Rhode Island Independence Day 

ADDRESSES AND POEMS 

Nineteen Hundred and Nine 




Gass ^^'^S 



/ 



y 




THOMAS W. 

PRESIDENT 



CKN ELL 

. C. H. A. 



Rhode Island 
INDEPENDENCE DAY 

Addresses and Poem 

May 4. 1909 



ADDRESS— By Hon. R. B. BURCHARD 

1908 



ADDRESS— By Hon. CHARLES WARREN LIPPITT 

1906 



UNDER THE AUSPICES OF 

The 

Rhode Island Citizens Historical 

Association 



THOMAS W. BIGKNELL 

President of the Rhode Island Citizens Historical Association 
EDITOR 



1909 



■t'r ^--1 ,^^ 






FOREWORD 



)-. On Saturday, May the fourth, 1776, the General Assembly of 

Rhode Island, in session at the Old State House in Providence, 
r dissolved its allegiance to George the Third, King of Great Britain, 

annulled all commissions, writs and processes issued in the name 
^ and under the seal of the king, and substituted therefor the fol- 

(*■ lowing words of authority, The Governor and Company of the 

(T' English Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. 

This solemn act is called "Rhode Island's Declaration of 
Independence." It placed Rhode Island at the head of an in- 
dependent democracy two months in advance of the great Declara- 
tion of Independence of the thirteen United Colonies, made and 
promulgated at Philadelphia, July fourth, 1776. 

While it was well-known to all students of Rhode Island his- 
tory that our state was the first to take this decisive step towards 
civil freedom, the honor of recognizing and honoring the day by 
a public celebration belongs to Tpie Rhode Island Citizens His- 
torical Association. On the fourth of May, 1906, the citizens 
of Rhode Island were invited by this Association to meet at the 
Mathewson Street M. E, Church, Providence, R. I., to enjoy an 
elaborate program, prepared for the occasion. Invitations were 
sent to the General Assembly of the State, to the Supreme Court, 
to leading officials of state, cities and towns, to historic and patri- 
otic societies and to the churches and civic bodies. A large au- 
dience gathered to honor the occasion. Governor George H, Utter, 
Ex-Governors William Sprague, Charles Dean Kimball and Charles 
Warren Lippitt and others prominent in all walks of life were 
present. The opening address was made by President Thomas W. 



Bicknell of the Rhode Island Citizens Historical Association. 
Prayer was offered by Rev. Henry M. King, D. D. The historical 
address was delivered by Honorable Charles Warren Lippitt. 
Other addresses were made by Governor Utter, Ex-Governors 
Sprague and Kimball, and by Professor W. H. Munro, president 
of the Rhode Island Historical Society. 

Full reports of the proceedings appeared in the daily press of 
the State, and editorial and other reference was made by the leading 
daily papers of New England and New York, thereby recognizing 
and emphasizing the importance of the event, and setting apart a 
real historic day in Rhode Island and American history. 

The crowning event of the first celebration was the oration 
of Honorable Charles Warren Lippitt in which he not only estab- 
lished the primacy of Rhode Island in her Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, but also gave due credit for all acts of sister colonies, 
looking towards independence. This very important paper appears 
in this volume in its original form, without notes or exhibits. 
These will appear at a later date in connection with the address, 
as revised, enlarged and annotated by the author. 

In 1907 the Association secured the Old Representatives Hall 
in the Old State House for its meeting, the session being held in 
the same room (somewhat altered) where the Declaration of 
May 4th, 1776, was first read by its author, Jonathan Arnold. Ad- 
dresses were made by President Bicknell, Governor James H. 
Higgins, Honorable Roswell B. Burchard and Theodore F. Green, 
Esq., and an original poem was read by Mrs. Harriette M. Miller. 

In 1908 and 1909 the Association celebrated the day in the same 
hall in the Old State House, and in the latter year the room was 
designated "Independence Hall." In 1908 addresses were deliv- 
ered by President Bicknell and Honorable Roswell B. Burchard and 
a poem was read by Mrs. Fidelia Reynolds. Speaker Burchard's 
comprehensive, able, and eloquent address of 1908 appears in this 
volume. 



In May 1908 the General Assembly passed an act in recog- 
nition of May the Fourth as Rhode Island's Independence Day and 
established the method of its public celebration in the public schools 
of the state and elsewhere. 

The following program was most successfully carried out on 
IMay fourth, 1909, 



EXERCISES 

ON 

Rhode Island Independence Day 



Tuesday, May 4th, 1909, at 3 P. M. 



Independence Hall, Old State House, North Main Street, 

Providence, R. I. 



MUSIC 

Violin Solo — Serenade Schuhert-Remenyi 

Miss Ella Beatrice Ball. 
Soprano Solo — Roger Williams Emory P. Russell 

Miss Olive Emory Russell. 
Violin Solo — Opus XI. H. Vieuxtemps 

Miss Ball. 
William Andros, Pianist. 



Honorable Thomas W. Bicknell, 
President of the Rhode Island Citizens Historical Association 

will preside. 



I. Singing — The Old Hundredth Psalm, by the Congregation. 
II. Prayer — Rev. Frank J. Goodwin, Pawtucket, R. I. 

III. Address by Thomas W. Bicknell, — "The Declaration of In- 

dependence Embodied in the Charter." 

IV. Singing — "America," by the Congregation. 



V. Reading of the Act Declaring Our Independence — 
Mr, Horatio B. Knox, State Normal School. 
VI, Historical Address, by Honorable William P, Sheffield, 

United States House of Representatives. 
VII. Original Poem — Mrs. Sarah A. Chandler, Providence, R. I. 
VIII. Address, by Honorable Aram J. Pothier, Governor of 
Rhode Island. 
IX. Singing — "Battle Hymn of the Republic." 
X. Benediction. 



A Declaration of Independence 



BY 



The Colony of Rhode Island and 
Providence Plantations 



Enacted by the General Assembly at The Old State House 
in Providence, May FourtJi, I//6. 



AN ACT, 



Repealing an act, entitled "An act, for the more effectually 
securing to His Majesty the allegiance of his subjects in this, his 
Colony and dominon of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." 
And altering the forms of Commissions, of all writs and processes 
in the Courts, and of the oaths prescribed by law. 

Whereas, in all states, existing by compact, protection and 
allegiance are reciprocal, the latter being only due in consequence 
of the former ; and. 

Whereas, George the Third, King of Great Britain, forgetting 
his dignity, regardless of the compact most solemnly entered into, 
ratified and confirmed to the inhabitants of this Colony by his illus- 
trious ancestors, and, till of late, fully recognized by him, and en- 
tirely departing from the duties and character of a good King, in- 
stead of protecting, is endeavoring to destroy the good people of 
this Colony, and of all the United Colonies, by sending fleets and 
armies to America to confiscate our property and spread fire, sword 
and desolation throughout our country, in order to compel us to 
submit to the most debasing and detestible tyranny ; whereby we are 
obliged by necessity, and it becomes our highest duty, to use every 



9 

means with which God and nature have furnished us, in support 
of our inviolable rights and privileges, to oppose that power which 
is exerted only for our destruction. 

Be it therefore enacted by this General Assembly, and by the 
authority thereof it is enacted, that an act, entitled "An act for the 
more effectually securing to His Majesty the allegiance of his sub- 
jects, in this his Colony and dominion of Rhode Island and Prov- 
idence Plantations," be, and the same is hereby repealed. 

And be it further enacted by this General Assembly, and by 
the authority thereof, it is enacted, that in all commissions for 
ofifices. Civil and Military, and in all writs and proccesses in law, 
whether original, judicial or executory, civil or criminal, whereon 
the name and authority of the said King is made use of, the same 
shall be omitted, and in the room thereof, the name and authority 
of the Governor and Company of this Colony shall be substituted in 
the following words to wit : 

The Governor and Company of the English Colony 
OF Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. 

That all such commissions, writs and processes shall be other- 
wise of the same form and terms as they heretofore were ; that the 
Courts of Law be no longer entitled nor considered as the King's 
Courts ; and that no instrument in writing of any nature or kind 
whether public or private, shall, in the date thereof, mention the 
year of the said King's reign. 

Provided, nevertheless, that nothing in this act contained shall 
render void or vitiate any commission, writ, process or instrument 
heretofore made or executed, on account of the name and author- 
ity of the said King, being therein inserted. 



10 



GENERAL ASSEMBLY— MAY 1776. 



The Hon. Nicholas Cooke, Governor. 

The Hon, William Bradford, Deputy Governor. 



]\Ir. John Jepson, 
Mr. John Collins, 
Maj.-Gen. Simeon Potter, 
Mr. Ambrose Page, 
Mr. John Sayles, Jr., 



Assistants. 

Mr. James Arnold, 
Mr. Jonathan Randall, 
Mr. Peter Phillips, 
Mr. William Potter, 
Mr. Thomas Church. 



Mr. John Wanton, 
Mr. Samuel Fowler, 
Mr. George Sears, 

Col. Jonathan Arnold, 
Mr. John Brown, 

Mr. Metcalfe Bowler, 
Mr. John Coddington, 



Deputies. 
Neivport. 

Mr. Gideon Wanton, 
Mr. Thomas Freebody, 
Col. Joseph Belcher. 

Providence. 

Mr. John Smith, 
Col. Amos Atwell. 

Portsuionth. 

Mr. John Thurston. 



Mr. William Greene, 
Mr. Jacob Greene, 



IVarzvick. 

Mr. Charles Holden, Jr., 
Col. John Waterman. 
Westerly. 
Maj.-Gen, Joshua Babcock, Col. Joseph Noyes. 

North Kingstown. 
Mr, John Northup, Mr. Sylvester Gardner. 



11 



South Kingstown. 
Capt. Samuel Seagar, Mr. Samuel Babcock. 

East Greenwich. 
Mr. Job Comstock, Mr. Thomas Shippee. 

Jamestown. 
Capt. Samuel Carr, Mr. Benjamin Underwood. 

Smithfield. 
Mr. Daniel Mowry, Jr., Capt. Andrew Waterman. 

Scituate. 
Mr. Christopher Potter. Col. William West, 

Gloccste)\ 
Mr. Richard Steere, Col. Chad Brown. 

Charlesiown. 
Capt. Joseph Stanton, Jr., Mr. Jonathan Hazard. 

West Greenzv 
Mr. Thomas Tillinghast, Mr. Judiah Aylworth. 

Coventry. 
Mr. Ephraim Westcott, Mr. Jeremiah Fenner. 

E.xetet. 
Mr. George Pierce. 

Middleioivn. 
Mr. Joshua Barker, Mr. Nicholas Easton. 

Bristol. 
Mr. Shearjashub Bourn, Col. Nathaniel Pearce. 

Tiverton. 
Mr. Gideon Almy, Col. John Cooke. 

Little Compton. 
Capt. Thomas Brownell, Mr. Daniel Wilbur. 

Warren. 
Mr. Cromwell Child, Col. Sylvester Child. 

Cumberland. 
Mr. John Dexter, Capt. Elisha Waterman. 



12 

Richmojid. 
Mr. Samuel Tefft, Major Richard Bailey. 

Cranston. 
Mr. Andrew Harric, Mr. Zuriel Waterman. 

Johnston. 
Mr. Jolin Fenner, Mr. Peleg Williams. 

North Providence. 
Major Thomas Olney, Mr. Jonathan Jenckes, Jr. 

Barrington. 
Mr. Edward Bosworth, Capt. Thomas Allin. 

Hopkinton. 

Mr. John Larkin. Mr. Thomas Wells. 

The Hon. Metcalfe Bowler, Speaker. 

JosiAH Lyndon, Clerk. Mr. Henry Ward, Secretary. 

Mr. Henry Marchant, Attorney-General. 

Mr. Joseph Clarke, General Treasurer. 



Rhode Island's 
Independence Day 



An Act Providing for the Observance of the Fourth of May 

IN Each Year. 

It is enacted by the General Assembly as foUozvs: 

Section i. The fourth day of May in each and every year 
hereafter is hereby estabHshed, in this state, as "Rhode Island In- 
dependence Day;"— being a just tribute to the memory of the mem- 
bers of our General Assembly, who, on the fourth day of May, 1776 
—in the state house at Providence, passed an act renouncing alle- 
giance of the colony to the British Crown, and by the provisions 
of that act declaring it sovereign and independent ; — the first official 
act of its kind by any one of the thirteen American colonies. 

Sec. 2. On each and every fourth day of May hereafter, ex- 
cept when the said day falls on the first day of the week (commonly 
called Sunday), then on the day following, the governor shall cause 
salutes of thirteen guns to be fired, at 12 o'clock, noon, by detach- 
ments of the state artillery, at all places in the state where stationed, 
and shall cause a display of state and national flags on all armories 
and other state buildings from sunrise to sunset, in honor of 
"Rhode Island Independence Day." 

Sec, 3. The fourth day of May in each and every year here- 
after is hereby established in the annual school calendar to be known 
as "Rhode Island Independence Day," and shall be observed with 
patriotic exercises in all the public schools of the state, as herein- 
after named. It is also provided that when such day such fall on 
Saturday, or on Sunday, such patriotic school exercises shall be 
on the preceding or following days, respectively, as the case may be. 



14 

Sec. 4. The state Commissioner of Public Schools shall annu- 
ally prepare a program of patriotic exercises for the proper obser- 
vance of "Rhode Island Independence Day" in the schools, and 
shall furnish printed copies of the same to the school committees of 
the several cities and towns of the state, at least four weeks pre- 
vious to the fourth day of May in each year. 

Sec. 5. The fourth day of May as herein named shall in no- 
wise be construed as a holiday. 

Sec. 6. This act shall take effect on its passage. 

Passed May 26 ipo8. 

The addresses and poems of 1907, and 1908 have been printed 
in pamphlet form and distributed to the members of the General 
Assembly, state officials, the libraries of the state, and the mem- 
bers of the Rhode Island Citizens Historical Association. This vol- 
ume contains the addresses and poem of 1909, the address of Hon- 
orable Roswell B. Burchard of 1908, and the address of Honorable 
Charles Warren Lippitt of 1906. 

The Association hereby expresses its thanks to the General 
Assembly for an appropriation to print the present volume. Its 
pages contain historic truths and lessons of patriotism and civic 
virtue of great value for all the people of our commonwealth. 

THOMAS W. BICKNELL, 

President R. I. C.H. A. 
June 15, 1909. 



THE ROYAL CHARTER 

of 1663 

The Basis of Civil and Religious 
Freedom in America 

BY 

THOMAS W. BIGKNELL 

President of the Rhode Island Citizens 
Historical Association 



Great men and their deeds and great facts of history are Hable 
to He bedded in the soil of forgetfulness until some resurrective 
force raises men and facts to the light and life of honest and 
honorable recognition. Such century plants survive ordinary 
human achievement and in time find their permanent place in the 
orders of social and civil life. 

The fourth of May, 1776, Rhode Island Independence Day, 
was almost a forgotten fact, until brought into public recognition 
by our Association in 1906, the importance of which was recog- 
nized by the General Assembly, two lears later, by an act making 
the day one of great patriotic significance to the youth in our pub- 
lic schools and to the people of the state. Honor is due to men who 
appreciate and cheerfully accord the honor due to their ancestors 
of faith and deeds. To-day, in Independence Hall, we gather to 
remember the men who made this day famous and to honor by 
song and story their mighty acts. 



16 

I have it in mind to show that the principles of civil and re- 
ligious liberty as set forth in the democratic constitution of the 
several states of our republic and in the constitution of the United 
States, were clearly enunciated, set forth, and solemnly enacted in 
the Royal Charter, given to the colony of Rhode Island by King 
Charles, the Second, July 8, 1663. In other words, I propose to 
show that the rights, privileges and prerogatives of a free com- 
monwealth, under modern constitutional enactments, inhered in 
and were guaranteed by that charter, and that the Colony of 
Rhode Island was to all intents and purposes de jure, a free and 
independent republic, under a strict construction of constitutional 
jurisprudence, from the 8th of July, 1663, until the 4th of May, 
1776. 

A few important facts of Rhode Island history will preface 
my argument. 

In the year 1636, Roger Williams, banished from Massachu- 
setts Bay Colony, with a few companions, planted a town on the 
banks of the Moshassuck, calling it Providence, and his territorial 
purchase of the Narragansetts, Providence Plantations. In 1638, 
William Coddington and others, likewise banished from Massa- 
chusetts Bay Colony, planted at Portsmouth, and, in 1639, Codding- 
ton with John Clarke and others planted a town on the south end 
of Aquidnick, calling it Newport, and the territorial possessions, 
acquired of the Narrgansetts, Rhode Island. Here we have the 
birth of three towns. Providence, 1636; Portmouth, 1638; Newport, 
1639, and two colonies, Providence Plantations in 1636, and Rhode 
Island Colony, 1638-9. In 1643, Samuel Gorton and ten others, 
having enjoyed a double banishment, from Plymouth Colony and 
Rhode Island Colony, purchased Shawomet, or Warwick of the 
Narragansetts, and settled the fourth town, outside the two settle- 
ments already made. The new town of Gorton's constituted a third 
colony, each of the three being independent municipalities, 



17 

without recognition by any home or foreign power. A 
common enemy, the Indians, led Aquidneck to move for a 
charter from the British Parhament, and with the acquis- 
cence of the plantations, Mr. Williams was selected as agent 
to secure the same. On the 17th of September, 1644, Mr. 
Williams, returning from England, landed at Boston with the first 
patent, constituting the three colonies, "The Incorporation of Provi- 
dence Plantations in Narragansett Bay." This state paper, con- 
ferring absolute independence on the United Colonies of the four 
towns, was not adopted by them until 1647, when in a General As- 
sembly, held at Newport, in May of that year, a colonial govern- 
ment was organized and John Coggeshall of Newport was chosen 
president of the colony. The charter of 1643, while omitting ref- 
erence to religious concerns was at the time of its procurement the 
most liberal state paper in existence and was the forerunner of the 
more complete and remarkable document of 1663. 

In 1648 and 1649 William Coddington of Newport was made 
president of the four united towns of the colony. On the execu- 
tion of Charles the First, and the accession of Cromwell and the 
Puritan Commonwealth, Coddington sailed to England secretly, 
and in the midst of the confusion of the new regime, obtained a 
commission as Governor for life of the islands of Aquidneck and 
Conanicut. This strange act virtually nullified the charter and 
left Warwick and the plantations with the whole Narragansett 
country at the mercy of the avaricious colonies of Connecticut and 
Massachusetts Bay. The whole colony was aroused and John 
Clarke, representing the Rhode Island towns, and Roger Williams 
the towns of Warwick and Providence Plantations were sent to 
England in 165 1 to obtain a recall of Coddington's powers, and the 
restoration of the charter of 1643, and in 1652 the successful mis- 
sion of Clarke and Williams was welcomed by the people, — a re- 
sult largely due to the influence of Sir Harry Vane and John Mil- 



ton, both ardent friends of the Rhode Island principle, as repre- 
sented by its three great advocates of civil and religious liberty, 
Roger Williams, John Clarke and Samuel Gorton. In 1654, Mr. 
Williams returned to Providence, leaving John Clarke in England 
to protect the interests of the four towns, again united in one 
colony. 

The death of Cromwell and the accession of Charles the 
Second in 1660 witnessed a new crisis in our colonial history, when 
not only our charter rights were destroyed, but even our territorial 
holdings were put in great jeopardy. The restoration of the Stuarts 
and the annulment of the acts of the long Parliament made it nec- 
essary for Rhode Island to seek a new charter. The hour for a 
great diplomat had come, and Dr. John Clarke, the greatest Ameri- 
can diplomat of his age, was at the post of duty,, as well as dan- 
ger, in the great emergency, and after long and wearisome debate, 
fierce and determined opposition from the London agents of Con- 
necticut and Massachusetts Bay Colonies, and malignant personal 
abuse from unexpected quarters, he secured the signature and seal 
of Charles the Second on the 8th day of July, 1663, creating in per- 
petuity the English colony of Rhode Island and Providence planta- 
tions in the Narragansett Bay, New England in America. 

And what was its content of constitutional freedom? 

First was the recognition of the absolute right of the Indian 
tribes to the soil and the guarantee of the Indian titles to estates 
in fee simple to the original planters of the colony. This was a re- 
markable concession, in that it annulled all prior claims to Indian 
lands by right of discovery or conquest as vested in the crown, and 
established the contracts as made between the settlers and the Nar- 
ragansetts as valid and binding on all concerned. The words of 
the charter are, "and are seized and possessed, by purchase and con- 
sent of the said natives, to their full content, of such lands, islands, 
rivers, harbors, and roads, as are very convenient, etc." By these 



19 

words all Indian land titles were confirmed and established by royal 
consent and authority throughout Rhode Island. In other colonies 
the lands were bestowed by the crown and confirmed by the natives, 
but here Indian sales were confirmed by the King and as a further 
grant, the settlers were permitted "to direct, rule, order and dispose 
of all other matters and things, and particularly that which relates 
to the making of purchases of the native Indians." These conces- 
sions were in answer to the claims of Clarke and Williams, so long 
maintained, that the Indians were the rightful owners of the soil 
they occupied. 

Next to the perfect guarantee of Indian titles, was the perfect 
and complete guaranteed political life in a body politic styled "THE 
GOVERNOR AND COMPANY OF THE ENGLISH COLONY 
OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANATA- 
TIONS, ETC." "that by the same name, they and their successors 
shall and may have perpetual succession, and shall and may be 
persons able and capable, in the law to sue and be sued, to plead 
and be impleaded, to answer and be answered unto, to defend and 
be defended, etc. * * * ^s others our liege people of this our 
realm of England, or any corporation or body politic within the 
same may lawfully do." 

This body so ordained contained within itself all the machin- 
ery of government, perfect, absolute, complete in and of itself, re- 
sponsible for its acts and so constituted as to fulfill all the func- 
tions of self -protection and defense. 

Still further, to set this complicated machinery of state in order 
and motion, "we will and ordain, and by these presents, for us, our 
heirs, and successors, do declare and appoint that for the better 
ordering and managing of the affairs and business of the said com- 
pany, and their successors, there shall be one Governor, one deputy- 
governor and 10 assistants, to be from time to time, constituted, 
elected and chosen, out of the freemen of the said company, for 



20 

the time being, in such manner and form as is hereafter in these 
presents expressed, which said officers shall apply themselves to 
take care for the best disposing and ordering of the general busi- 
ness and affairs of and concerning the lands, and hereditaments 
hereinafter mentioned to be granted, and the plantation thereof, 
and the government of the people there. And, for the better exe- 
cution of our royal pleasure herein, we do, for us, our heirs and 
successors, assign, name, constitute, and appoint the aforesaid Bene- 
dict Arnold to be the first and present Governor "of the said com- 
pany, and the said William Brenton to be deputy governor," with 
10 assistants therein named, to continue in office until the first 
Wednesday in May, next coming. And "forever thereafter" the 
major part of the freemen shall elect assistants and deputies semi- 
annually, to a meeting or assembly to be called The General As- 
sembly, "to consult, advise and determine, in and about the affairs 
and business of the said company and plantations." 

1 SIMPLE DEMOCRACY. 

Here was American democracy pure and simple. 

First, the freemen whose qualifications were determinable by 
the body politic, the corporation of Rhode Island. Suffrage, by 
this instrument, was limited only, as to-day, by the will of the 
people. No word as to manhood or womanhood suffrage, no prop- 
erty qualification, no reference to native or foreign born — simply 
the freemen. 

Further, "the major part of the freemen of the respective 
towns," elected their representatives. Here we have the great law 
of majority rule in elections, which has held sway in town and state 
legislative procedure for three centuries. The Rhode Island town 
is here recognized as the unit of political institutions and the pur- 
est illustration of popular government of, for and by the people. 



21 

The General Assembly as above constituted and elected by the 
freemen, in town meeting assembled, was granted full power and 
authority "from time to time and at all times hereafter to appoint, 
alter and change such days, times and places of meeting and Gen- 
eral Assembly as they shall think fit ; and to choose, nominate and 
appoint such and so many other persons as they shall think fit, and 
shall be willing to accept the same, to be free of the said company 
and body politic, and them into the same to admit ; and to elect and 
constitute such offices and officers and to grant such needful com- 
missions, as they shall think fit and requisite, for the ordering, man- 
aging and dispatching of the afifairs of the said Governor and com- 
pany, and their successors ; and from time to time to make ordain, 
constitute or repeal such laws, statutes, orders and ordinances, 
forms and ceremonies of government and magistracy as to them 
shall seem meet for the good and welfare of the said company, and 
for the government and ordering of the lands and hereditaments, 
hereinafter mentioned to be granted, and of the people that do, or 
at any time hereafter shall inhabit or be within the same ; so as such 
laws, ordinances and constitutions, so made, be not contrary and 
repugnant unto, but as near as may be, agreeable to the laws of this 
our realm of England, considering the nature and constitution of 
the place and people there, and also to regulate and order the way 
and manner of all elections to offices and places of trust, and to 
prescribe, limit and distinguish the numbers and bounds of all 
places, towns or cities within the limits and bounds hereinafter 
mentioned, and not herein particularly named, who have, or shall 
have, the power of electing and sending of freemen to the said 
General Assembly ; and also to order, direct and authorize the im- 
posing of lawful and reasonable fines, mulcts, imprisonments and 
executing other punishments, pecuniary and corporal, upon offend- 
ers and delinquents, etc., according to the course of other corpora- 
tions in the English realm." 



22 

The General Assembly was "to appoint, order and direct, 
erect and settle such places and courts of jurisdiction, for the hear- 
ing and determining of all actions, cases, matters and things, hap- 
pening within the said colony and plantation, and which shall be in 
dispute, and depending there, as they shall think fit and also to 
distinguish and set for the several names and titles, duties, powers 
and limits, of each court, office and officer, superior and inferior; 
and also to contrive and appoint such forms of oaths and attesta- 
tions, not repugnant, but as near as may be agreeable, as aforesaid, 
to the laws and statutes of this our realm, as are convenient and 
requisite with respect to the due administration of justice, and due 
execution and discharge of all offices and places of trust by the 
persons that shall be therein concerned." 

Religious liberty was confirmed and forever established in the 
remarkable utterances, the leading declaration of which appears in 
a prior letter from Dr. John Clarke to Charles II., under date of 
1662. This letter sets at rest forever the authorship of the senti- 
ment cut in marble in the facade of the State House, and so often 
credited to Roger Williams. It is a monument to the greatness of 
Dr. John Clarke. 

"And whereas, in their humble address, they have freely de- 
clared, that it is much on their hearts (if they may be permitted) 
to hold forth a lively experiment, that a most flourishing civil state 
inay stand and best be maintained, and that among our English sub- 
jects, with a full liberty in religious concernments; and that true 
piety rightly grounded upon gospel principles, will give the best 
and greatest security to sovereignty, and will lay in the hearts of 
men the strongest obligations to true loyalty: Now, know ye, that 
we, being willing to encourage the hopeful undertaking of our said 
loyal and loving subjects, and to secure them in the free exercise and 
enjoyment of all their civil and religious rights, appertaining to them, 
as our loving subjects; and to preserve unto them that liberty, in 



23 



the true Christian faith and worship of God, which they have sought 
with so much travail, and with peaceable minds, and loyal subjec- 
tion to our royal progenitors and ourselves to enjoy; and because 
some of the people and inhabitants of the same colony cannot, in 
their private opinions, conform to the public exercise of religion, 
according to the liturgy, forms and ceremonies of the Church of 
England, or take or subscribe the oaths and articles made and estab- 
lished in that behalf; and for that the same, by reason of the remote 
distances of those places, will (as we hope) be no breach of the unity 
and uniformity established in this nation: Have therefore thought 
fit, and do hereby publish, grant, ordain and declare. That our 
royal will and pleasure is, that no person within the said colony, at 
any time hereafter shall be anywise molested, punished, disquieted, 
or called in question, for any differences in opinion in matters of 
religion, and do not actually disturb the civil peace of our said col- 
ony; but that all and every person and persons may, from time to 
time, and at all times hereafter, freely and fully have and enjoy his 
and their own judgments and consciences, in matters of religious 
concernments, throughout the tract of land hereafter mentioned, 
they behaving themselves peaceably and quietly, and not using this 
liberty to licentiousness and profaneness, nor to the civil injury or 
outward disturbance of others, any law, statute, or clause therein 
contained, or to be contained, usage or custom of this realm, to the 
contrary hereof, in any wise notwithstanding." 

In this declaration as to rights of conscience in religious con- 
cerns, Dr. Clarke quotes from the famous letter of Charles the 
Second to the Commons, known as the Declaration of Breda, April 
4-14, 1660, in which he affirms "that no man shall be disquieted or 
called in question for differences of opinion in matters of religion 
which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom." 

Other valuable privileges and concessions were granted, but 
enough have been presented to show that the Rhode Island govern- 



24 

ment was clothed with all the powers and prerogatives of a free, 
democratic republic. Territorial rights, citizenship, freemanship, 
the franchise, administrative assemblies, a representative govern- 
ment, an unrestricted law-making power, an independent judiciary, 
freedom of speech, of political action, of conscience, of religious 
faith, were granted to Rhode Island by the sovereign grace of Charles 
the Second, the founder and friend of a free colony, under the 
broad imperial aegis of Great Britain. 

On so broad a platform of constitutional rights, the colony of 
Rhode Island stood, the freest commonwealth in principle and the- 
ory on the face of the earth. So broad, so practical, so efficient 
were the provisions of this great charter of human rights and of 
constitutional government that it stood all the needs of colonial life, 
a period of 113 years, and then served the needs of a state consti- 
tution within the Federal Republic for 67 years — a total of 180 
years. 

Our state historian Arnold says of it: "Under it the state 
was an absolute sovereignty with powers to make its own laws, re- 
ligious freedom was guaranteed, and no oath of allegiance was re- 
quired. Rhode Island became in fact, as well as in name, an inde- 
pendent state from that day." 

"The extent of the power conferred by this charter is indeed 
surprising. The military arm, always relied upon as the distinc- 
tive barrier of the throne, is formally and fully surrendered to the 
people, in this instrument, even to the extreme point of declaring 
martial law — a grant, which in repeated cases, the government of 
Rhode Island successfully defended in later years against the 
threats and the arguments of the royal governors of New England." 

"With this charter, serving as the basis of government, rather 
than prescribing its form, the state led the way in the final struggle 
for national independence." 



25 

Henry Cabot Lodge, in his History of English Colonies in 
America, who wittingly holds the ancient Massachusetts animus as 
to our colonial government says : "Clarke was an adroit and an able 
man; * * * Clarke's charter soon after passed the seals and 
the Governor and Company of Rhode Island were fairly incorpor- 
ated. This charter was drawn in the most liberal terms possible — 
establishing a purely popular elective government — while it bore 
the marks of its author in its provision that no one should be mo- 
lested for any religious opinion, if the peace was kept." 

To Bancroft, our greatest American historian, belongs the 
honor of bestowing upon the Rhode Island charter of 1663, the first 
position as a state paper among the records of civilized men, and 
of according to Dr. John Clarke, the agent of the Colony of Rhode 
Island and the author of the immortal document, enduring words 
of praise. 

After referring to the remarkably liberal charter of the Colony 
of Connecticut of 1662, he writes: "Rhode Island was fostered by 
Charles II with still greater liberality. When Roger Williams had 
succeeded in obtaining from the Long Parliament the confirmed 
union of the territories that now constitute the state, he returned 
to America (1654) leaving John Clarke as the agent of the colony 
in England. Never did a young commonwealth possess a more 
faithful friend; and never did a young people cherish a fonder de- 
sire for the enfranchisement of mind, 

" 'Plead our case, they had said to him in previous instructions 
which Gorton and others had drafted, in such sort as we may not 
be compelled to exercise any civil power over men's conscience ; we 
do judge it no less than a point of absolute cruelty.' * * * The 
good-natured monarch listened to their petition; Clarendon ex- 
erted himself in their behalf; the making trial of religious freedom 
in a nook of a remote continent could not appear dangerous; it 
might at once build up another rival to Massachusetts and solve 
a problem in the history of man." * * * 



26 

THE OLDEST CHARTER. 

"This charter of government, estabhshing a political system 
which few besides the Rhode Islanders themselves then believed to 
be practicable, remained in existence till it became the oldest con- 
stitutional charter in the world." * * * "Nowhere in the world 
were life, liberty and property safer than in Rhode Island." 

He calls Dr. John Clarke, "the modest and virtuous Clarke, 
the persevering and disinterested envoy," who "parted with his little 
means for the public good ;" and "left a name on which no one can 
cast a shade." 

And so it came to pass in the i6th year of the reign of Charles 
II, King of England, to wit, in 1663, through the intercession of 
Dr. John Clarke, Envoy Extraordinary from the Colony of Rhode 
Island and Providence Plantations, for 12 years, to wit, from 1651 ; 

That, the boundaries of the colony were clearly defined; 

That, the Indian deeds of lands were confirmed; 

That, the estate of freemen was created; 

That, civil government was vested in this democratic estate; 

That, a de facto government was established and set up; 

That, the law-making power was vested in an elective body, 
styled the General Assembly; 

That, a judiciary was created for the determination of justice; 

That, a military force was ordained for defense; 

That martial law was vested in the executive; 

That, freedom of worship and of conscience was made the 
basis of individual rights; 

And, all under the laws, ordinances and constitutions, "agree- 
able to the laws of this our realm of England, considering the na- 
ture and constitution of the people there." All these things and 
more were embodied in that great instrument, the Royal Charter; 
were the inherent elements of our Declaration of Independence, and 
have been the foundations of the civil state we love and honor. 



Rhode Island Independence 

BY 

Hon. ARAM J. POTHIER 

Governor 



We have reason to take pride to-day in the fact that Rhode 
Island was the pioneer state in declaring independence of mon- 
archial rule. It is a source of just pride, and the celebrations in 
the schools and elsewhere through the state are a fitting and be- 
coming manifestation of that pride. 

That a period of one hundred and thirty-three years should 
have lapsed before the state gave proper recognition to the signifi- 
cance of this day, is a tribute to our industrialism, rather than a re- 
flection upon our Rhode Islandism. For when, not many months 
ago, the realization dawned upon the people that our state could 
claim such rare distinction, the Rhode Island spirit was not slow to 
respond, and the new statute, less than a year old, permanently 
establishing Rhode Island Independence Day and providing the 
manner of observance was promptly enacted. 

And to-day the booming of cannon by detachments of our state 
artillery throughout the length and breadth of Rhode Island pro- 
claims the fact of her supremacy one hundred and thirty-three years 
ago — her rank as a pioneer in the independent thought of those 
stiring times that "tried men's souls." 

And as a pioneer in independent thought Rhode Island has ever 
distinguished herself. The instance we cite and commemorate 
to-day by no means stands alone, nor was it without precedent. The 



28 

foundation for that act of the General Assembly on May 4, 1776, 
was laid one hundred and forty years before, when those sturdy 
minds that scorned to see through others' eyes, freed themselves 
from the ties that bound them to the tyrant custom, and facing the 
wilderness, set up on these Rhode Island shores an unheard-of in- 
stitution. And in that lively experiment then and there held forth, 
demonstrating to the satisfaction of the world that a most flourish- 
ing civil state might stand and best be maintained with full liberty 
in religious concernments, there was sown the seed of independent 
thought in Rhode Island. 

The fruit of that seed has been rich, ripe and plentiful through 
the centuries; lighting the pathway and blazing the trail in many 
lines of human effort, producing here many of the leaders of 
national calibre in thought and action, in times of war and of 
peace, in affairs of government, in arts and sciences, in literature 
and in logic — carrying the fame of Rhode Island and Rhode Is- 
landers to the four quarters of the earth, and establishing a whole- 
some pride and faith in the citizenship of the state which no attacks 
from within or without have availed to wound or to shake. 

With its record as a successful pioneer in independent thought 
established, with its galaxy of great men, great deeds, and great 
accomplishments setting the examples and shaping the courses 
which others have followed, Rhode Island has every encouragement 
to take the initiative wherever the pathway of activity and endeavor 
may open with promise of effectual achievement. 

The past history of Rhode Island hardly furnishes precedent 
for blindly following where some one else has led. Our aims should 
be not to imitate, but to improve upon the work of others. 

Often in our public life to-day we see evidences of a tendency 
or willingness to adopt , without question, a course suggested by the 
experience of other states. In the framing of new legislation, we 
frequently hear the argument advanced that other legislative bodies 



29. 

have adopted certain plans of action, or specific propositions for 
the regulation of the problems that the present age is constantly 
presenting, and that Rhode Island would do well to follow their 
example. 

I am one of those who believe that because Massachusetts, or 
Connecticut, or some other commonwealth, has adopted a definite 
policy in its government, is not in itself a sufficient reason why 
Rhode Island should go and do likewise. We should endeavor to 
profit by the experience of others, it is true, but we should exer- 
cise the greatest care that in profiting by their virtues we also profit 
by their mistakes. 

Our laws in Rhode Island must be framed to meet conditions 
as they exist in Rhode Island, where our contracted limited area, 
our broad expanse of navigable waters, our dense population and 
our compact industrial communities create a situation peculiar to 
this state and duplicated in no other. 

A policy that may be admirable for our neighbors may prove 
detrimental in the highest degree to ourselves, and an experiment 
that has resulted in failure elsewhere may have in it the very es- 
sentials that Rhode Island requires. 

Only by the exercise of that independence of thought in our 
public acts that is traditional in our state — by establishing every 
undertaking on the firm foundation of true expediency — can we be 
at all certain of avoiding the pit-falls that may lurk in the at- 
temped adaptation of the cure for other's ills to our own. In 
ministering intelligently and independently to the needs of our 
state, ready to utilize or to discard the ideas of others as our 
mature judgment may dictate, lies not only our future safety and 
continued progress, but also our highest value to our sister states 
and to the nation. 

Let Rhode Island continue henceforth, as she has in the past, 
a pioneer in thought, fostering the spirit of mental self-reliance, 
to the perpetuation of those traditions which make this ancient 
structure wherein we stand to-day, a national land-mark, and to a 
permanently greater, better, patriotic service to the nation. 



Rhode Island's Declaration of 

Independence and Events 

Leading Up To It 

BY 

Hon. WILLIAM P. SHEFFIELD 

Member of Congress from Rhode Island 



On this very spot, one hundred and thirty-three years ago to- 
day, Rhode Island first of the American Colonies, repealed its Act 
of Allegiance to the British Crown and struck the King's name from 
its processes and legal proceedings. 

This substantial declaration of independence, characteristic of 
Rhode Island's individuality and courageous independence of 
thought, must have been a great inspiration to the more cautious 
and hesitating colonies and an incentive to the Continental Con- 
gress in its final declaration for all the colonies on the memorable 
Fourth of July. 

We love to review the glorious page of our history and to 
recall the individual characteristics of our founders, who never 
hesitated, when they believed they were right to stand alone in 
defiance of the public opinion of the world, as indicating that 
Rhode Island was merely following the traditions of its past, when 
the smallest colony of all stepped forth first to defy alone the 
King's wrath as an independent state. 

Just as Roger Williams proclaimed soul liberty and held forth 
the lively experiment of founding a most flourishing state in civil 



31 

things alone; just as he proclaimed the necessity of absolute justice 
to a dependent people, when he annunciated the principle that their 
lands could only be acquired from the Indians by King James by fair 
purchase, even at the risk of a charge of treason from his Mass- 
achusetts neighbors; just as Rht)de Island, throughout its colonial 
history, maintained its separate existence and the integrity of its 
territory from the jealous attack of its neighbors; so with the same 
independent courage, Jonathan Arnold moved and the Colonial 
General Assembly on the 4th of May, 1776, passed the resolution 
by which Rhode Island at the head of the procession became the 
first American state. 

Governor Lippitt has with great accuracy set forth the histor- 
ical claims of this state to her unique position on this occasion. 
And though on May 2Gth the President may meet in Mecklenberg, 
North Carolina, to listen to the claims of an unorganized county in 
that state, to the honor of the first Declaration of Independence on 
May 20, 1775, a declaration which contained many of the exact 
phrases of the great declaration of the Continental Congress of 
July 4th, 1776, no one can believe that these county resolutions were 
ever passed or that anything was done in North Carolina, except 
the passage of votes urging action upon Congress on the succeeding 
May 31st. The glory of North Carolina in these resolutions of 
May 31st can only be dimmed by the false claim of May 20th. 

So much has been gathered by the diligence of this Society in 
the instructive addresses delivered at its successive celebrations of 
this event, that little can be added in exposition of the action of 
May 4th, except to rehearse Rhode Island's part in the beginnings 
of the Revolution and to recite the natural sequence to the Declara- 
tion of May 4th. 

It was no accident, that we were ready to take our stand for 
independence, when others hesitated. From the commencement of 
the contest, even at the beginning of the causes that led to the 
Revolutionary War, Rhode Island led the way. 



32 

At the close of the long war with France, Quebec had fallen 
and the British Colonies had no foe on the continent except the 
warring Indian tribes, who were gradually being forced back from 
the frontier by advancing civilization. Of this period a British 
historian has said: "If ever any country might have been styled 
the seat of human felicity, British America must unquestionably 
deserve the appellation." 

Fundamentally the principal occupation of the colonies was 
agriculture. England had systematically discouraged manufact- 
ures by confining to each locality the use of its own products and 
preventing the reciprocal exchange of their domestic manufactures. 
With their enterprise repressed in this direction, some of the col- 
onies had turned to commerce, and the extent of this development 
and the wealth realized from it, rivalled that of England herself. 
No where had commerce then developed more than in the many 
harbors around Narragansett Bay. Some of this traffic was car- 
ried on in violation of the laws of England and of foreign countries. 
Such was the famous triangular voyage; rum to Africa, negroes to 
the French West Indies and sugar to Rhode Island, which brought 
a large profit on each run. Another was the carrying of fish and 
farm produce to the Spanish Main where they were sold for specie, 
which furnished the hard money of the colonies. These later 
voyages were forbidden by Spain and not by England. If there 
were laws in the statute book against trading with the French 
colonies they had not been effectively enforced before 1763. 

At the close of the French War, with a debt of 148 million 
pounds, taxes of every denomination were levied in England, and 
no channel of trade escaped its proportion. The nation staggered 
under its burden. They recalled that the war had been waged 
largely for the colonies and the benefit of the war fell largely to 
America in its freedom from any near foe. It seemed natural that 
America should bear its fair share of the tax burden. 



33 

But the law already prevented the development of manufact- 
ures in the colonies and when England increased the customs duties 
and enforced rigorously the acts in restraint of colonial commerce, 
it destroyed the prosperity of this country. British sloops of war 
seized American vessels and prevented them from engaging in trade 
to the Spanish Main ; a trade which Spain had been unable to pre- 
vent. With the inflow of specie thus stopped, it made it still more 
difficult to pay in silver the increased duties whch England exacted 
from the surviving trade of the colonies. 

At this time, the Stamp Act was passed and while it was a 
tax exacted in England, and with manufactures and commerce 
encouraged it was a comparatively light tax for the colonists to 
pay. Yet with these destroyed it excited the bitterest opposition. 

The passage of the Stamp Act aroused a most interesting dis- 
cussion of the true principles of constitutional liberty and the rights 
of Englishmen under the British Constitution, which continued up 
to the opening of the Revolutionary War. 

Perhaps nowhere and at no time, have the true principles of 
liberty and freedom under a constitutional government been abler 
and more fundamentally set forth than in the various addresses, 
pamphlets and newspaper articles of this colonial period. 

The claim advanced by Stephen Hopkins and others, was that 
the colonies in America held directly from the King and in their 
domestic affairs were subject only to the laws made by their own 
legislatures and were entirely independent of the Acts of Parlia- 
ment, except so far as those acts regulated the external affairs of 
the British Empire and that the colonies were "entitled to all the 
freedom and liberty that British subjects enjoy." How far this 
contention was supported by the authorities interpreting the Brit- 
ish Constitution, may be a question. It found some encourage- 
ment in the doctrines of some of the liberal and enlightened states- 
men of England, and put the approaching struggle upon the high 

3 



34 

plane of human liberty ; while the effective causes urging to the 
struggle were really economic, founded on statutes, which the col- 
onists admitted the legal right of Parliament to pass as effecting the 
commerce of the empire. 

The most effective causes of the Revolution which made 
Rhode Island so ready to take the lead of the other colonies in 
making its Declaration of Independence, which we celebrate to-day, 
lay in those acts on the part of the Crown from 1763 to 1776 which 
sought to crush its widely developed commerce. The constant 
friction arising from the arbitrary enforcement of repressive and 
unjust acts of Parliament; acts, which all nations having colonies 
were then accustomed to pass and enforce, made a wide breach be- 
tween England and America. 

The daring enterprise of the merchants and privateersmen of 
Narragansett Bay, which had carried the flag of England on every 
sea and which in the Colonial Wars had done so much to sustain 
the supremacy of Great Britain, could not be thus suppressed. A 
maritime and warlike people met force by force. 

Non-importation agreements had been tried upon the British 
manufacturer with some effect, but when the British naval officers 
enforced the navigation laws with unnecessary harshness, the peo- 
ple broke forth in frequent violence, which constituted the first 
armed resistance to the Crown in America. 

An instance of this character, which was brought before the 
King in Council, was the firing on the Squirrel in Newport Harbor, 
on Monday, July 9th, 1764. 

Perhaps as one of the first overt acts of the colonists against 
the armed forces of Great Britain, we may be pardoned for quot- 
ing in full the report of Lieutenant Thomas Hill of His Majesty's 
schooner St John : — 

"On tb', 30th of June, being at Newport, in Rhode Island. I 
received information that a brig was unloading in a crec!:, near 



35 

Howland's Ferry. I immediately weighed anchor, and went in quest 
of her. Upon my arrival there, I found the vessel had unloaded 
her cargo and sailed. 

"I forthwith made seizure of the cargo, which consisted of 
ninety-three hogsheads of sugar ; and at night sent the boat manned 
and armed, in pursuit of the brig, which was taken the next morn- 
ing, at day break, and proved to be the Basto, of New York, Win- 
gate, master, from Monto Cristo. 

"I re-loaded the sugars on board her; and the owner being 
apprehensive that I intended to carry her to Halifax, had me ar- 
rested, and obliged me to find bail that she should be brought to 
Newport and tried there; on the 4th of July, the collector of the 
customs re-seized the brig and cargo, under a pretence that I was 
not properly qualified ; although I imagined that I had taken ali the 
necessary oaths at Halifax; yet it seems the oath of office had been 
omitted ; I immediately set out by land, for Boston, to consult the 
surveyor general, on this matter ; and in my absence, the mob at 
Newport endeavored to destroy the King's vessel. The following 
is the account which I received of this affair, from my officers, 
upon my return. 

" 'On Monday, the 9th of July, 1764, at two o'clock in the af- 
ternoon, sent the boat, manned and armed, on shore, to bring off 
Thos. Moss, a deserter, who had left the vessel some days before, 
and was then on the wharf ; a large mob assembled and rescued 
him ; and seeing our people in great danger, we fired a swivel, un- 
shotted, as signal for the boat to come on board. The mob took Mr. 
Doyle, the officer of the boat, prisoner, and wounded most of the 
boat's crew, with stones, which fell as thick as hail round and in 
the boat; and they threatened to sacrifice Mr. Doyle, if the pilot 
was not immediately sent on shore, and delivered up to their mercy ; 
they even threatened to haul the schooner on shore, and burn her. 

" ' At five, we sent the boat on board the Squirrel, to acquaint 
the commanding officer of our situation. In the meantime, the 



36 

mob filled a sloop full of men, and bore right down to board us; 
but seeing us determined to defend the vessel, they thought proper 
to sheer off and go on shore again. 

" ' At six, the boat returned from the Squirrel, with orders to 
get under way, and anchor close under her stern. The mob grow- 
ing more and more tumultuous, we fired a swivel, and made a signal 
to the Squirrel, for assistance, and got under sail. As soon as the 
mob saw our design, they sent a sloop and two or three boats full 
of men to the battery on Goat Island, and began to fire on us, not- 
withstanding the lieutenant of the Squirrel went on shore and 
forbade the gunner to do any such thing. They even knocked him 
down; and it was with difficulty that he got from them; they fired 
eight shot at us, one of which, went through our mainsail, whilst 
we were turning out. 

" ' At eight, we anchored in ten fathom water, within half a 
cable's length of the Squirrel and received one shot more from the 
battery, which went close under the Squirrel's stern. They threat- 
ened to sink us, if we did not immediately weigh and run into the 
harbor again; but upon the Squirrel's getting a spring upon the 
cable and bringing her broad side to bear upon the battery, they 
left off. 

" 'At eleven, next morning they set Mr. Doyle at liberty." 

When Captain Smith of the Squirrel waited on the Governor 
and Council with reference to the affair, "They agreed that the gun- 
ner had acted by authority and they would answer for it when they 
thought it necessary." 

In the same year, one of the boats of the Maidstone was seized 
by 500 men and burned in front of the court house, at Newport. 

A similar outbreak (without the Governor and Council how- 
ever, assuming responsibilities for it) was the destruction on 
July 17th, 1769 of the sloop of war Liberty after it had seized the 
sloop Sally, Edward Pinker, master, belonging to New London, 



37 

Conn., for violating the custom regulations and the Brig, Capt. 
Packwood, master, which had duly reported its cargo. A contem- 
porary account, apparently by an eye-witness, published in the 
"Newport Mercury" at the time, for the purpose of making light 
of the affair to the Home Government, is as follows : — 

"Last Monday morning, the 17th inst., the armed sloop Lib- 
erty commanded by Capt. William Reid, arrived here, and brought 
in a brig and sloop, belonging to Connecticut, taken in the sound, 
without this colony, on suspicion of the brig's having done some 
illicit act, and that the sloop had contraband goods on board ; but as 
no proof appeared against the brig, she reported her cargo at the 
custom house here ; and on Wednesday, no prosecution having been 
entered against either of them, Capt. Packwood went on board the 
brig, in order to get his sword, and some necessary apparel, which 
the commanding officer on board, (one of the Liberty's men) re- 
fused to let him bring away ; and, 'tis said, offered him violence ; 
which reduced Capt. Packwood to the necessity of drawing his 
sword, to force his way into the boat. Whereupon, the officer 
called upon the Liberty's people to fire on Capt. Packwood, as he 
was going ashore, which they did ; and a brace of balls, 'tis sup- 
posed, went very near, but did not hurt him; they then attempted 
to fire several more guns upon him, which, happily all snapped or 
flashed, and could not be discharged. 

"This attempt of violence, by the Liberty's people, whose com- 
mander has never condescended to exhibit his commission to the 
Governor of this colony, so enraged a number of persons, that, 
the ensuing evening, having met Capt. Reid on the Long Wharf, 
they obliged him to send for his men on shore, in order to discover 
the man who first fired on Capt. Packwood ; upon which, Capt. Reid 
sent for all hands, except his mate. Afterwards, a number of persons 
unknown, went on board the Liberty, sent the mate away, cut her 
cables, and let her drift ashore at the Point; when they cut away 



38 

her mast, scuttled her, and carried both her boats to the upper part 
of this town, and burnt them. 

"While this affair was transacting, the sloop suspected of 
having contraband goods on board, made her escape, and the brig" 
has since received her papers, and sailed last Friday." 

As we approach closer to the final break with the Mother 
Country, we come to the destruction of the British schooner, 
Gaspee, on the night of June Qth, 1772. Some of the leading citi- 
zens of Providence (gathered by drum, through the principal 
streets of the town) by force seized and burnt the vessel, wound- 
ing the commanding officer, Lieut. Dudingston and lemoved its 
crew. 

In the investigation that followed .the destruction of the 
Gaspee, the Royal Instructions provided for the arrest of the per- 
sons concerning it, "in order to the said offenders being sent to 
England to be tried for that offence." 

This provision raised in the colonies much apprehension, as 
to the future of their rights and liberties, passing beyond the realm 
of the enforcement of revenue laws, and custom regulations to the 
freedom of the British subject. The colonies had long been dis- 
turbed at the exercise of arbitrary jurisdiction in custom cases by 
the Admiralty Courts, through a judge without the intervention of 
the jury. But one of the most sacred rights of Englishmen which 
liad come down from Magna Charta, was in criminal cases to be 
tried by a jury of one's peers from the vicinage. If this right was 
to be set aside and leading citizens resisting the arbitrary acts of 
royal officers were to be transported across the sea and tried in the 
courts of England, then was freedom at an end ; then was it time 
to unite and fight for liberty. 

On March 12th, 1773, the House of Burgesses of Virginia 
passed its resolutions appointing a "Standing Committee of Cor- 
respondence and Inquiry" and inviting the other colonies to join 
with them, containing the following specific instruction : 



39 

"Resolved, That it be an instruction to said committee that 
they do without delay, inform themselves particularly of the prin- 
ciples and authority on which was constituted a Court of Inquiry, 
said to have been lately held in Rhode Island, with powers to 
transport persons accused of offences committed in America, to 
places beyond the seas to be tried." 

Rhode Island and the other colonies followed soon with the 
appointment of a similar committee. From that time until the as- 
sembling of the Continental Congress, the course of resistance to 
Great Britain, was largely guided by this effective organization of 
committees. 

Inspired by the repeated independent and courageous acts of 
Rhode Island in defiance of the authority of the King, other col- 
onies joined in resistance to Great Britain. Lexington and Concord 
in April was followed by the Battle of Bunker Hill in June 1775, 
and then came the seige of Boston. 

Let us view for a moment the situation in Rhode Island when 
the act of May 4, 1776 was passed. 

As early as December 1774, the Assembly had ordered the 
cannon, powder and stores to be removed from Fort George to 
Providence and the Governor did not hesitate to inform the King's 
officers that the guns would be used to defend the liberties of the 
colony. On April 22, 1775, this colony raised its "Army of Ob- 
servation" of 1,500 men and actively engaged in waging war 
against the King's troops. It removed its duly elected Governor 
for loyalty to his King; and Wallace with his vessels had made his 
headquarters in Narragansett Bay during much of the year 1775, 
brutally oppressing its inhabitants. Armies had been raised and 
commissioned in the King's name "in defence of the liberties of 
America," test oaths presented and enforced ; the property of the 
King's subjects had been confiscated for loyalty to His Majesty 
and yet the General Assembly adjourned at its March session A. D. 
1776 with the customary formal "God save the King." 



40 

The Continental Congress was fast approaching the question 
of a Declaration of Independence; New England had long been 
ready for independence. North Carolina on April 12th, 1776 had 
passed its vote of instruction to its delegates "to concur with the 
delegates in the other colonies in declaring independency and form- 
ing foreign alliances." It must have been apparent to every think- 
ing legislator, that it was unwise, if not ridiculous, to keep on the 
statute book, the laws against treason to the King, which made 
every legislator and most of the people of the colony, criminals and 
still more unreasonable after over a year of active warfare, to ad- 
minister (to the officers of the colony) oaths of loyalty to the King. 

The Act, passed by the General Assembly, whose anniversary 
we celebrate, in its title, and in the substance of its enactments did 
little more than to recognize the course of events. 

But Rhode Island had a great charter of her liberties, which was 
well adapted to her existence as a free American state (for more 
than a century) and with the changes made by the Act of May 
4th, she stood forth then, as an independent commonwealth. 

When the Continental Congress on May 15th, 1776 passed the 
following vote: 

"Resolved, That it be recommended to the respective Assem- 
blies and conventions of the United Colonies, where no government 
sufficient to the exigences of the affairs has hitherto been estab- 
lished to adopt such government as shall in the opinion of the rep- 
resentatives of the people best conduce to the happiness and safety 
of their constituents in particular and America in general," there 
remained nothing for Rhtode Island to do but to comply with this 
resolution. 

On May i, 1775, Massachusetts had already passed an Act 
similar to the Rhode Island Act, reciting the wrongs of the col- 
onies and "that the absurdity of issuing commissions, writs &c in 
the name and stile of the King of Great Britain is very apparent," 



41 

and providing that commissions, writs &c "shall be in the stile and 
name of the Government and People of Massachusetts Bay in New 
England," subject to ceratin contingencies contained in the act. 

On May 15th, Virginia framed its constitution and instructed 
its delegates to vote for independence. 

On June 15th, Delaware passed resolutions striking out the 
King's name in the government and substituting therefor, "the 
Government of the Counties of Newcastle, Kent and Sussex upon 
Delaware" to be used "until a new government shall be formed." 

And the other colonies, as they organized from time to time 
under new constitutions pursuant to the suggestions of the Conti- 
nental Congress, struck the King's names from their commissions 
and writs. 

When the Declaration of Independence which was adopted 
by the Continental Congress, July 4th, was communicated to the 
Rhode Island Assembly, the declaration was approved and pub- 
lished, but it required no further action on their part except to 
change from the Title of the Government under the Act of May 
4th "the Governor and Company of the English Colony of Rhode 
Island and Providence Plantations" to the title "the State of Rhode 
Island and Providence Plantations," as it has remained ever since. 

It may be doubted if the full significance of the Act of May 
4th as marking the final separation from the Mother Country was 
appreciated by the General Assembly at the time; for while, there- 
after the General Assembly ceased to close its sessions with the 
pious and loyal invocation "God save the King," it did not close 
the records with "God save the Colony," but omitted all reference 
thereto until the Declaration of July 4th, when thereafter the ses- 
sions were closed with "God save the United States." 

In thus hastily reviewing the Acts of Rhode Island in the 
stirring events which led to the Revolutionary War and the cour- 
ageous stand which this colony took for its independence in the Act 



42 

of Alay 4th, 1776, we feel that the story of our state can not be too 
often recited and held up to the pride and emulation of the youth 
and citizens within our borders. 

That the light of religious liberty dawned in Rhode Island; 
that the principles of a free democracy here reached their highest 
development and that the earliest and most devoted patriotism, 
which led to the freedom and independence of the nation were here 
displayed, must ever be a proud heritage to every citizen of Rhode 
Island, whether his ancestors contributed to that result or whether 
lie has sought here a home for his descendants in the land and under 
the institutions hallowed by the memory of Roger Williams, John 
Clarke, Stephen Hopkins, Oliver Hazard Perry and many others. 



Rhode Island's 
Independence Hall 

By Mrs. Sarah A. Chandler. 



Do you know that beautiful legend 

Of the King and the Princess fair? 
She dwelt in the sunny southland. 

His home was the wild beast's lair. 
All nature trembled before him, 

And shrank from the grasp of his hand, 
And chafed at the wide desolation 

His presence spread over the land. 

But there came a day when the Princess 

In her garments of silvery sheen, 
Flung wide o'er the desolate landscape 

Her mantle of emerald green. 
With her magical wand she loosened 

The grasp of the pitiless King. 
All nature burst forth into singing. 

For winter had yielded to spring. 

A hundred and thirty-three years ago 

We were held in the grasp of a hand 
That destroyed instead of protected 

The God-given rights of our land. 
Whose acts of despotic oppression 

In patriot hearts left a sting 
That rankled, because of injustice 

Meted out by a pitiless king. 



44 



Not for long could the crown of Great Britain 

Regardless of compact and right 
Compel this patriot people 

To submit to its power and might. 
There came a day, when its bondage 

Should oppress them, never again, 
Not through the wand of a Princess, 

But by the stroke of a pen. 

When the sun shone out o'er the city 

That eventful morning in May, 
There seemed nothing to mark it so different 

From many another May-day. 
Birds caroling their songs from the tree tops, 

The sweet scented breath of the morn, 
Gave not a hint that Rhode Island's 

Most illustrious day had been born. 

Yet this day of all others was destined 

To make for this brave state a name. 
To give her an honor peculiar, 

A glory that never should wane. 
To strike from her shoulders oppression 

And all that its bondage had wrought, 
And substitute freedom of action. 

Which long her brave townsmen had sought. 

In this old State Capitol building, 

In this hall where we've gathered to-day. 
Our own Declaration of Freedom 

Was launched on its peace giving way. 
T'was our own little state that declared it. 

The first in all this broad land, 
To openly bid bold defiance 

To a king's despotic command. 



45 



We know that we have the distinction 

Of being the smallest state; 
And we may be a trifle old fashioned ; 

In all things not quite up to date. 
Is it true that the wealth of a jewel 

Is valued because of its size? 
Do the largest flowers in our garden beds 

Most appeal to admiring eyes? 

Do you think that the little violet 

In its modest garb of blue 
Would exchange it's native sweetness 

For the sunflower's gaudy hue? 
Do you fancy that little Rhode Island 

Would exchange her memories sweet 
For an empire's boasted glory, 

Though willingly laid at her feet ? 

Go ask of the murmuring waters 

Where the Gaspee met her fate, 
Or the whispering pines in the church yard 

Where lie our heroes of State. 
Or list for your echoing answer 

From the walls of this Temple of Fame, 
Emblazoned with burning and eloquent words 

That immortalized many a name. 

No need for us to distinguish 

Ourselves by such deeds as did they, 
When they met in this old "Independence Hall" 

That eventful Fourth day of May. 
The hated yoke of oppression 

Long since has crumbled to dust, 
And bitterness born of tyranical rule 

Given place to freedom and trust. 



46 



They played well their part in life's drama; 

Their stage of action was bright 
With deeds of true loving devotion, 

That made for justice and right, 
Soon for them life's stage work was ended, 

It's shifting scenes knew them no more, 
And the final drop of the curtain 

Closed to them life's mystical door. 

All honor to the name of Jefferson, 

Of Hancock and Adams and Lee, 
And all of the great compatriots 

Whose act made a great nation free; 
But reverently this day do we gather 

To honor the names of our own. 
And with music, with rhyme, and with story. 

Perpetuate deeds they have done. 

And somehow I cannot help thinking 

If unrolled was the scroll of fame. 
And our eager eyes were permitted to scan 

Each honored, illustrious name, 
"Litttle Rhody's" would not be missing, 

But would stand out clear and bright 
With that of Jonathan Arnold, 

Whose pen declared for the right. 

The names of our heroes are many, 

Too many to give in my rhyme, 
But their deeds, their words and their virtues 

Are enshrined in our hearts for all time. 
We'n bring each an offering of Rose-mary sweet. 

And our garlands of pure Immortelle, 
And we'll scatter them here "for remembrance" 

As our story of freedom we tell. 



47 



And long may this quaint old State House 

Each recurring Fourth day of May, 
Tell to resident, pilgrim and stranger 

Why we honor this place and this day. 
And soon speed the time when in letters of gold 

That no power shall ever recall, 
We may read high up o'er it's doorway, 

"Rhode Island's Independence Hall." 



Rhode Island's Initiative in the 
Cause of Freedom 



BY 



Hon. ROSWELL B. BURGHARD 



Ladies and Gentlemen : 

Again we meet in this historic chamber to celebrate the birth- 
day of our state as an independent sovereignty among nations, to 
commemorate her struggle for freedom and to perpetuate her fame. 
I find in my intercourse with men a growing necessity for popular 
associations such as this of yours. In days of prosperity and luxury 
patriotic sentiment it apt to lose its keen edge and the knowledge 
and appreciation of a picturesque and inspiring past is apt to be- 
come the exclusive property of scholars and specialists. While the 
writing of history is becoming an exact science and historic work 
increases in value, the results are too apt to reach only those pos- 
sessed of learning or leisure, the historical libraries to become the 
cenotaphs of ancient greatness frequented only by the devoted few. 

The history that strengthens and ennobles a race is that which 
passes by song and story from man to man, from generation to 
generation; the patriotism that inspires is that which is imbibed at 
the mother's breast; the altar of patriotism, as that of religion, 
which holds the veneration of men when all other influences fail, 
is the mother's knee. It was the Sagas as well as the northern tem- 




U) 

^ m 
r r 







z 2 




49 

pest that put blue blood into the Norseman's veins, the Greek epics 
created more heroes than they celebrated; and the English balladi 
strengthened hearts of oak through all the centuries of Great 
Britain's power. 

Recall if you will Macauley's lyric description of the Roman 
fireside : 

"And in the nights of winter 

When the cold north winds blow, 
And the long, howling of the wolves 

Is heard amidst the snow ; 
When 'round the lonely cottage 

Roars loud the tempest's din 
And the good logs of Algidus 

Roar louder yet within ; 

"When the oldest cask is opened, 

And the largest lamp is lit; 
When the chestnuts glow in the embers. 

And the kid turns in the spit; 
When young and old in circle 

Around the firebrands close; 
When the girls are weaving baskets, - ■• 

And the lads are shaping bows ; 

"When the goodman mends his armor 

And trims his helmet's plume; ' 

When the goodwife's shuttle merrily 

Goes flashing through the loom; 
With weeping and with laughter 

Still is the story told. 
How well Horatius kept the bridge 

In the brave days of old." 

That is the sort of history lesson to start heroic blood bound- 
ing in youthful breasts. 



50 

I am not one to maudle over the "good old days" or to deplore 
the progress of events, but we are forced to admit that our an- 
cestors enjoyed some influences and delights which few of our off- 
spring know. Happy is that family, and thrice blessed are those 
children whose hearthstone, in cottage or in mansion, warms its 
household with the fire-glow and the heart-glow that inspired the 
good, gray poet of Amesbury to bequeath to us the priceless legacy 
of that best of American idylls, the poem "Snow Bound." 

When I was a boy the great public school which I attended 
did much for us in that we were allowed a few minutes or a half 
an hour, each morning, for Bible-reading, prayer, songs and recita- 
tions ; and how the window-frames rattled with our lusty and per- 
haps not over-musical peans of "Hail Columbia," "Red, White and 
Blue," and "Marching Through Georgia!" And how we waxed 
eloquent to the weeping point over "Barbara Frietchie," "Paul Re- 
vere's Ride," and "The Fate of Virginia!" I am told that a prac- 
tical, over-scientific board of trustees has bruslied most of this 
old-fogyism away, and that Froebel's influence now predominates 
over that of George Washington. 

I remember also how I used to glow all over when my mother 
told me the story of how her grandfather saved the life of 
the British Colonel Simcoe, protecting him from the zealous wrath 
of several of his companions, New Jersey soldiers, and how he re- 
ceived not only the souvenir of a scar from a bayonet-wound in his 
leg, but also a message of thanks from Washington for securing 
so valuable a prisoner. And I felt something of proper pride, too, 
when she told me how, as a little girl, she sat upon Lafayette's 
knee, though I doubt if her dear lips were any sweeter because the 
illustrious general had kissed them. 

But I beg your pardon for going so far afield. 

I started out to express my appreciation of your work and its 
patriotic and educational value in the verbal transmission of his- 



51 

toric lore, both in these pubHc celebrations and in your society 
meetings, and especially in your pleasant and profitable excursions 
to historic places. 

This is a formidable subject which your honored president 
has given me, and I must say I feel somewhat like the raw and 
lanky youth, who going into the study of an ancient instructor in 
the mysteries of Bowditch's Navigator, said, "Pa and Fs goin' to 
sail tomorrow. Pa's captain and I'm goin' as mate and I came in 
to learn navigation before I went." 

Please keep in mind that though my subject touches that of 
Rhode Island's war-record for freedom, it does not include it. 
Hence, I am not to speak of battles on sea and shore in which 
Rhode Island's officers and men have been conspicuously valiant, 
or of great deeds performed in times of peace, except those in 
which Rhode Island took the initiative. I shall say nothing original, 
nor disclose any newly discovered facts. I have used the standard 
[histories, especially Mr. Arnold's, freely and almost literally. 

Think, however, of what a rich vein for poetry or romance, 
only partially revealed, lies in the annals of Rhode Island. What 
a story Cooper would have woven out of the adventures of Ben- 
jamin Church! What a ringing ballad the author of Ivry or of 
the Burial March of Dundee would have made out of the burning 
of the Gaspee! Longfellow had good material for another of the 
Tales of the Wayside Inn in the stirring episode of the scuttling 
and burning of the sloop Liberty. And how entertaining a "Twice 
Told Tale" Hawthorne might have created out of the incident 
when the General Assembly at East Greenwich deposed Governor 
Wanton and stolidly refused to administer to him his oath of of- 
fice because, though he had been loyal to the colonists, he refused to 
approve the raising of an army, or to sign the commissions of its 
officers ! The lyrical narration of the rides of Paul Revere and 
Phil Sheridan will pepetuate the romance of Middlesex and the 



52 

Shenandoah forever, but who has crystallized in verse the fame of 
the midnight ride of Lafayette from Newport to Boston, seventy 
miles in ten hours, in order to head off the fleet of his countryman, 
D'Estaing, and send it back to the relief of beleaguered Rhode Is- 
land? Although the French Commander refused to return and al- 
though the war was prolonged unnecessarily for years, the failure 
was not that of the gallant marquis. Oh no, he had learned the truth 
that Aldrich sang a century later, 

"They fail, and they alone, who have not striven." 

It is unnecessary to rehearse to you the story of the Gaspee. 
But, "lest we forget" it is well to recall each year that the torch 
of liberty flamed from her burning deck, three years before "the 
shot heard round the world" was fired at Concord. I was taught 
in school that the first bloodshed in the Revolution was the Boston 
Massacre. You will find a Newport Massacre recorded in Arnold's 
History, as follows: 

"While such excited feelings existed in the two countries it 
was natural that collisions should occur between the officers of one 
and the people of the other. A fatal affray between some people 
at Newport and three midshipmen of the Senegal, man-of-war, ly- 
ing in the harbor, resulted in the death of Henry Sparker, who 
was run through the body by an officer named Thomas Careless. 
The coroner's inquest returned a verdict of wilful murder. Another 
man was severely wounded." 

Careless was afterwards acquitted on the ground of self-de- 
fence. Perhaps he himself might have thought it only a careless 
affair. The event was not so momentous in its effects as the Bos- 
ton Massacre but it was bloodshed under circumstances precisely 
similar to those which consecrated the ground in front of the 
Boston State House on March 5th, 1770, — and it occurred May 
3d, 1768. 



53 

John Fiske said: "Lord Sherbrooke * ♦ * declared a few 
years ago ♦ * * that the Battle of Marathon was really of 
less account than a modern colliery explosion for only 192 of the 
Greek army lost their lives ! From such a point of view one might 
argue that the Boston Massacre was an event of far less import- 
ance than an ordinary free fight among Colorado gamblers. It is 
needless to say that this is not the historic point of view. His- 
torical events are not to be measured with a foot-rule." — (Am. 
Rev. 1:83.) 

It has been said, in a half -apologetic way, that there was 
not the keen impetus to urge Rhode Islanders to rebellion that 
existed in Massachusetts and Virginia, because Rhode Island did 
not have to change its government to free itself from the mother 
country. Its charter had already given it a free and independent 
government; it was, in fact, a democracy in the beginning, the first 
American democracy. When all the other colonies except Con- 
necticut were governed from the throne, Rhode Island elected its 
own governor and was represented at the court of St. James by its 
own colonial agent, who represented the king on one side and the 
colony on the other. 

John Fiske says: "Rhode Island which had never parted with 
its original charter, did not need to form a new government, but 
it had already on the 4th of May omitted the King's name from its 
public documents and sheriffs' writs." 

The independence of Rhode Island began, in fact, when Roger 
Williams set foot on this free soil, and Rhode Island stoutly main- 
tained her independence until the culmination of events on the day 
we celebrate, when by deliberate act of her General Assembly, she 
struck the name of King from the charter of her liberties, assumed 
unto herself her own dominion and sprang like Minerva "full- 
armed from the brain of Jove," a sovereign state among the na- 
tions of the earth. Since then the people have ruled under an en- 



54 

lightened and orderly system of government, not as the hordes of 
Attila ruled, not as the Commune of Paris ruled, — ruled and 
swayed as the grasses of the Pampas are swayed, by momentary 
gusts of prejudice and power, but steadied as the procession of the 
celestial spheres in their course is steadied by the counterbal- 
ancing forces of liberty and law. 

But Rhode Island, while first to be free, was literally first 
to speak and act, and though the first clash of arms came not on 
her soil, the first to be ready to fight for freedom's cause, both in 
the revolutionary and the civil wars. Though like Switzerland 
and the free German cities, she has been conspicuous, — conspicu- 
ous as the sun-illuminated peak of the Matterhorn among the sur- 
rounding Alps, in the clear azure of human freedom, — in her own 
independent sovereignty, she was also conspicuous in the fight, 
shoulder to shoulder with Massachusetts and Virginia, wherever 
the American people, either as colonists or revolutionists or as a 
nation, strove in glorious exploit for the cause of liberty. She 
needs no apologist. The chronological record of her official acts 
inspires the plaudits of her fame. 

I do not propose to catalogue these annals. I can but point 
out a few instances where her people flashed a primal torch or 
struck an initial blow for freedom in religious, or governmental 
or race concernments. 

Ambassador Bryce in his American Commonwealth said of 
Rhode Island, "This little Commonwealth whose area is 1,085 
square miles (less than that of Ayrshire or Antrim) is of all the 
American states that which has furnished the most abundant 
analogies to the republics of antiquity and which best deserves to 
have its annals treated of by a philosophic historian." 

THE INITIATIVE IN RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. 

Rhode Island's first great initiative for freedom was in its 
founding. In his gift to the world of the doctrine of religious lib- 



55 



erty, Roger Williams stands among the few pre-eminent ones in 
the list of benefactors of mankind. His fame is secure in spite 
of ancient cabal and modern detraction. 

In the very first year of the new colony, however, Williams 
was confronted with a proposition which compelled his taking 
another initiative in making a practical stand upon a question which 
ever since has vexed courts and casuists alike, namely, How far 
may an individual carry his freedom of conscience against the con- 
victions of the majority? 

Mr. Arnold transcribes the incident from an ancient annaHst, 
as follows: 

"At Providence also the Devil was not idle. For whereas at 
their'ifirst coming thither Mr. Williams and the rest did make an 
order that no man should be molested for his conscience, now men's 
wives, and children, and servants, claiming liberty hereby to go to 
all religious meetings though never so often, or though private, 
upon the week days; and because one Verin refused to let his 
wife go to Mr. Williams' so often as she was called for, they re- 
quired to have him censured. But there stood up one Arnold, a 
witty man * * * and withstood it, telling them that when he 
consented to that order, he never intended it should extend to the 
breach of any ordinance of God, such as the subjection of wives 
to their husbands," etc. "Some were of opinion that if Verin would 
not suffer his wife to have her liberty, the church should dispose 
her to some other man who would use her better * * * Ar- 
nold told them that it was against their own order, for Verin did 
that he did out of conscience; and their order was that no man 
should be censured for his conscience." Arnold says, "This, then, 
is the earliest record that we have of the struggle between liberty 
and law, the rival elements which Rhode Island was to reconcile in 
the novel experiment of a self-governed state." 



S 



56 

We find nothing more of this incident excepting that Verin 
for the breach of the covenant for restraining liberty of conscience 
"was withheld from the liberty of voting till he shall declare the 
contrary." Years afterwards, however, Williams expounded his 
definition of the limitations of liberty of conscience in a letter to 
the town which is masterly in its good sense and in its method of 
illustration. He compared the state to a ship: "There goes many 
a ship to sea," he said, "with many hundred souls in one ship, 
whose weal and woe is common and is a true picture of a common- 
wealth, or a human combination, * * * j never denied, that 
notwithstanding this liberty" (the liberty to go or not to go to ship's 
prayer, etc.) "the commander of the ship ought to command a 
ship's course, yea, and also command that justice, peace and sobri- 
ety be kept and practiced, both among the seamen and all the 
passengers. * * * jf any should preach or write that there 
ought to be no commander or officers, because all are equal in 
Christ, therefore no masters or officers, no laws nor orders, * * 
I say I never denied but in such cases, whatever is pretended, the 
commander or commanders may judge, resist, compel, and punish 
such transgressors." 

THE INITIATIVE FOR POLITICAL LIBERTY. 

The second great initiative in the cause of freedom was the 
procuring of the first charter making Rhode Island an independent 
colony of Great Britain. This was procured through the personal 
eflforts of Roger Williams in 1644. When Williams went to Eng- 
land for this purpose, Charles I. was a fugitive. Says Mr. Clar- 
ence S. Brigham in Field's History of Rhode Island: "Most oppor- 
tune it was for Rhode Island that the party in power favored the 
very principles of toleration that Williams himself held." And in 
describing this charter, he continues: "It was not a mere land pa- 
tent, nor trading charter like that of Massachusetts. It was a real, 
effective governmental charter, bestowing upon the grantees the 
power to rule * * * by whatever form of government they saw fit, 



57 



and the right to make whatever laws they desired. * * * A distin- 
guishing feature of the charter was the Hmiting of its operation to 
civil things only. There was no express provision concerning lib- 
erty of conscience, for that, as Williams claimed, was a natural not 
a grantable right. The mere limitation to political concerns was 
the first example of the kind in the New World and was then con- 
sidered the chief principle of the Charter." 

The next grand initiative was the procuring of the famous 
charter of Charles ii, which, as you know, was the basis of our 
government as the Constitution now is, from 1663, not only until 
the Revolution but long afterwards; that is, Rhode Island, though 
one of the United States of America, continued to govern itself, 
in its internal affairs, under the King's charter, until it "got good 
and ready" to formulate a constitution, and that was not until 1842. 

This charter confirmed the doctrine of liberty of conscience in 
religious matters, and in political affairs it gave the people the right 
to elect their own governor and legislature. No other colony ex- 
cept Connecticut was granted any such concession. It is hard for 
us, born and bred in freedom, to appreciate the magnitude of this 
grant. It affected not only Rhode Island but incidentally all 
America. You must look back to Magna Charta for another such 
epoch-making decree. These, with the Declaration of Independence 
and the Emancipation Proclamation are the four dynamic forces 
of American freedom ; the four great refracting lenses that broad- 
ened and at the same time intensified Liberty's feeble beam, until 
now a mighty sun, it imparts heat and light and life to eighty mil- 
lions of freemen. 

Of this precious document, the original parchment you may 
see, in excellent preservation at your State House. I make it a 
point to show it as often as I can and I am surprised to find how 
many people there are who apparently never heard of it, and es- 
pecially, how many there are to whom its survival after the Rev- 
olution is a new story. The eloquent statement of Rhode Island's 
cherished doctrine, which is carved upon the front of the State 



58 

House, is a quotation from the charter. Its author was Dr. John 
Clarke, the agent for the colony in London, and it was first written 
by him in an address, known as the second address from Rhode 
Island to King Charles II, petitioning for the charter. In its 
primitive form it reads that the Rhode Island colonists have firmly 
adhered in their loyalty, although again and again allured there- 
from by many fair proffers by strangers and they "have it much on 
their hearts (if they may be permitted) to hold forth a lively ex- 
periment, that a flourishing civil State may stand, yea, and best be 
maintained, and that among English spirits with a full liberty in 
religious concernments."* 

Through the courtesy of the Secretary of State, I may show to 
you the fragments of the wax seal, the great seal of Charles II., 
which was suspended by a number of silken cords from the parch- 
ment document. The King's seal was quite as important a part of 
the royal insignia as the crown or the scepter. Charles II. had one 
engraved while an exile in France, immediately after the execution 
of his royal father. This is an impression from another seal made 
subsequently, but before the restoration. It was about four inches 
in diameter and weighed probably half a pound. The affixing of 
the great seal was an affair of some solemnity and ceremony, gen- 
erally performed by the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal or the Lord 
Chancellor himself. 

To hold this relic in the hand brings one in imagination very 
closely in touch with the ancient dignitaries who were participants 
in the concluding formality which made Rhode Island a self-gov- 
erning colony and almost an independent state. Although he did 
not attest the document, it may have been the hand of the great 
Lord Chancellor, the autocratic Lord Clarendon, who stamped 
this impression in the yielding wax, and we may imagine him in 
scarlet and ermine, with ponderous wig, falling like a cape upon his 
portly shoulders ; and the kingly Charles, careless, courtly and deb- 
onair, acknowledging the enactment to be his royal pleasure ; and 
good Dr. Clarke, the faithful agent of the people of these "planta- 
tions,'' clothed from powdered head to silver buckles in decorous 

*Mr. Burchard here exhibited the fragments of the great seal of 
England originally attached to the charter. 



59 

and seemly black, his eyes glowing with the fervor of thankfulness 
that, after twelve years' unceasin_g efforts with Parliament, Protector 
and King, Rhode Island's independence of her surrounding enemies 
had been secured. You should not forget, my friends, that the 
achievement of this memorable initiative in the cause of freedom 
was due to the labors of Dr. John Clarke of Newport in face of 
the opposition of Massachusetts, represented at Whitehall by no 
less notable agents than Edward Winslow and John Winthrop. 
Then as we follow the record of Freedom's onward march, the re- 
ception of this charter, as recorded in the minutes of the last meet- 
ing of the General Court of Commissioners at Newport under the 
old parliamentary charter, in its primitive and formal narration 
conjures up a picture upon which the patriotic Rhode Islander, with 
this relic before him, may dwell with satisfaction. 

"At a very great meeting and assembly of the freemen of the 
Colony of Providence Plantations, at Newport, in Rhode Island, in 
New England, November the 24, 1663. The abovesaid assembly 
being legally called and orderly met for the solemn reception of 
His Majesty's gracious letters patent unto them sent. * * * It was 
ordered and voted, ncme contra decente. i. That Mr. John 
Clarke, the colony agent's letter to the President, assistants and 
freemen of the colony, be opened and read, which accordingly was 
done with delivery and attention. 2. That the box in which the 
King's gracious letters were enclosed be opened, and the letters with 
the broad seal thereto afifixed, be taken forth and read by Captain 
George Baxter in the audience and view of all the people; which 
was accordingly done, and the said letters with His Majesty's royal 
stamp, and the broad seal, with much becoming gravity held up on 
high and presented to the perfect view of the people, and then re- 
turned into the box and locked up by the Governor, in order to the 
safe keeping of it." 

THE INITIATIVE IN OPPOSING THE TAXATION ACTS. 

In the agitation over the sugar and stamp acts which brought 
on the hostilities that culminated in the Revolution, Rhode Island 
was conspicuously aggressive. 



60 

In 1733, the year of the Sugar Act, Richard Partridge, the 
colony's agent in London wrote Governor Wanton a letter in 
which he said, "The levying a subsidy upon a free people without 
their knowledge, against their consent — a people who have no rep- 
resentatives in the state here . . . . is, as I apprehend, a 
violation of the right of the subject." Partridge presented a petition 
to Parliament for the colony, for the first time in the world putting 
forth the doctrine which forbids taxation without representation, 
a doctrine which became the bugle-call of American independence. 
Unfortunately a copy of this spe'ech has not been found, although 
that energetic pursuer of historic facts. Governor Lippitt, has in- 
stituted a persistent search for it on both sides of the Atlantic. 

Sir John Barnard sustained the petition in England and Gov- 
ernor Lippitt has supplied us with a copy of his great speech in 
which he first uttered this doctrine in Parliament. I think Governoi 
Lippitt was the first to call public attention to this memorable 
address reading it before the Society of Colonial Wars upon whose 
order it has been printed and distributed. In the address Sir John 
Barnard declares, "the people in every part of Great Britain have 
a representative in this House who is to take care of their partic- 
ular interests, as well as of the general interests of the nation; . 
. but the people who are the petitioners in the petition I 
have now in my hand" (namely, the people of Rhode Island) 
"have no particular representatives in this House, and therefore 
they have no other way of applying or of offering their reasons to 
this House, but in the way of being heard at the Bar of the House 
by their agent here in England, therefore .... the case 
now before us ought to be an exception to the general rule." 

In 1764, Governor Stephen Hopkins, at the direction of the 
General Assembly, forwarded a vigorous protest against the re- 
newal of the Sugar Act on similar grounds. 



61 

In March, 1764, Lord Grenville's stamp proposition was taken 
up in Parliament and it was voted, "that Parliament had a right to 
tax the colonies." The Sugar Tax was re-enacted about the sams 
time. Then the trouble was on and Rhode Island was right in it 
from the beginning. She awaited the action of no other colony. 
A special session of the assembly was immediately called; and a 
committee of correspondence was appointed to confer with the 
other colonies. Governor Hopkins' protest was received in England 
too late to be presented before the passing of the Stamp Act. 
Arnold says, however, "This address and the remonstrance of the 
Providence Board of Trade were conceived in a higher strain 
than any that were sent out by the other colonies." 

THE INITIAL BLOWS. 

These protests were followed shortly by a clash between the 
men on the revenue vessels and the people. Under an order given 
by two of the magistrates to the Governor of Fort George at New- 
port, the Schooner St. John, a tender to the warship Squirrel, was 
fired upon July 9, 1764. This you remember was four years before 
the Boston Massacre. Admiral Lord Colvill reported the affair to 
London; stating "the behavior of the people at Rhode Island . 

. was so extremely insolent and unprecedented, that I think 
it my duty to lay before their lordships an account thereof.'' But 
he cautiously added, "at the same time to observe from his conver- 
sation" (that of the captain of the vessel) "that I have reason to 
think there are many aggravating circumstances omitted in this 
account, which would appear upon strict inquiry into the affair." 
iN'me years afterwards the commission appointed by George III. 
to investigate the affair of the Gaspee took up this episode of the 
St. John, but silently dropped the matter — ^possibly "referred it 
to a committee." 

The British authorities began the impressment of sailors on 
vessels arriving at Newport, though they prudently let Newport 



62 

men alone. In retaliation, in May 1765 a small boat of the British 
vessel "Maidstone," which was engaged in this uncomfortable 
business, was dragged up the Newport common and burned with 
great hurrah. The people of Newport also burned effigies of the 
revenue officers and chased these officers aboard the revenue ship 
"Cygnet." A plan was set on foot to bombard and sink this vessel, 
but calmer counsels prevailed and the town consoled itself by 
sending a resolution to the General Assembly, urging action and 
declaring: "It is for liberty, that liberty which our fathers fought, 
that liberty which is dearer to a generous mind than life itself, 
that we now contend." Remember, my friends, while you are con- 
sidering Rhode Island's initiative that this resolution of the people 
of Newport was passed September 3d, 1765, and Patrick Henry's 
famous utterance delivered in the House of Burgesses in Virginia, 
"Give me liberty or give me death," was spoken in March 1775. 

INITIAL LEGISLATION FOR FREEDOM. 

Meanwhile the General Assembly were not slow in their ini- 
tiative action. Says Arnold, "One of the most important sessions 
ever held by the General Assembly was now (September 1765) 
convened at East Greenwich. Commissioners were appointed to 
attend the Colonial Congress at New York. Written instruc- 
tions were given to them which, while they professed the loyalty 
to the colony, to the king and parliament, declared "they would 
assert their rights and privileges With becoming freedom and 
spirit." And they were instructed, "to express their sentiments 
in the strongest manner." Resolutions were adopted in protest 
against the Stamp Act, "which," says Arnold, "were more energetic 
and concise than any that had yet been adopted by the other col- 
onies and printed directly to an absolution of the allegiance to the 
British crown unlesss the grievances were removed." . Here are two 
sections from these resolutions of the Rhode Island General Assem- 
bly of September, 1765, which I read to give you an idea of the 
temper of the colony at that early time: 



63 

"Section 4. That, therefore, the General Assembly of this 
colony have, in their representative capacity, the Only exclusive 
Right to lay taxes and imposts upon the Inhabitants of this Colony ; 
and that every attempt to vest such power in any Person or 
Persons whatever, other than the General Assembly aforesaid, is 
unconstitutional, and hath a manifest tendency to destroy the Lib- 
erties of the People of this Colony. 

"Section 5. That His Majesty's liege people, the inhabitants 
of this Colony, are not bound to yield obedience to any Law or 
Ordinance designed to impose any internal taxation whatsoever 
upon them, other than the laws and ordinances of the General As- 
sembly aforesaid. 

Section 6. That all the officers of the Colony, — be, and they 
are hereby directed, to proceed in the execution of their respective 
offices, in the same manner as usual; And that this Assembly 
will indemnify and save harmless all the said officers on account 
of their conduct agreeable to this Resolution." 

So, says Chief Justice Job Durfee, "She was the first to 
direct her officers to disregard the Stamp Act, and to assure them 
indemnity for doing so." 

In Virginia, Patrick Henry introduced resolutions of like tenor 
in the House of Burgesses, and under his inspiring initiative they 
were passed. But they were reconsidered and rescinded the next 
day, not to be adopted until four years later. 

On the day before the Stamp Act of 1765 was to take effect 
(November ist) all the royal governors took oath to sustain it. 
Remember Rhode Island's governor was not royal but was chosen 
by the people and was subject in most matters to the direction of 
the General Assembly. The historian Bancroft says, "Samuel 
Ward, Governor of Rhode Island, stood alone in his patriotic 
refusal" to take this oath. This was the Governor Ward of the 
famous Ward-Hopkins rivalry, which kept the political pot boiling 



64 

in Rhode Island for years. Both were men of great character 
and force. 

The revenue officer wrote to August Johnson, the distributor 
of stamps for Rhode Island, requiring him to supply the custom 
house. He replied that he had already resigned his position and 
that therefore there was no distributor, remarking suggestively that 
all the stamps were aboard the revenue ship Cygnet for safe- 
keeping. 

In view of the immunity promised in the resolution which I 
have read, the Rhode Island courts went right on about their af- 
fairs, issuing their writs without any stamps, in defiance of Par- 
liament; while the courts of the other states temporarily sus- 
pended business. 

In February 1768, Massachusetts sent out a circular letter to 
the other colonies urging concerted action against their enforce- 
ment of the taxation act. Parliament was greatly incensed and 
Lord Hillsborough, the Royal Colonial Secretary, wrote to the 
Governor of Rhode Island as follows : 

"As His Majesty considers this measure (namely the action 
of Massachusetts) to be of a most dangerous and factious ten- 
dency, calculated to enflame the minds of his good subjects in the 
colonies, etc., etc., it is His Majesty's pleasure that you should 
immediately upon the receipt hereof, exert your utmost influence 
to defeat this flagitious attempt to disturb the public peace, by pre- 
vailing upon the Assembly of your Province to take no notice of 
it, which will be treating it with the contempt it deserves." 

This was followed by a few civil expressions of His Majesty's 
fullest confidence in the aflfections of the people of Rhode Island 
and the expectation that they would give him the strongest proof 
of them. The reply of Governor Josias Lyndon, dated Newport 
1768, and written under the direction of the General Assembly, as 
these gubernatorial letters always were, was not all that the Royal 



65 

Colonial Secretary might have desired. It ran: "On the contrary 
that letter (i. e., the letter from the Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives) appears to this Assembly to contain a just representa- 
tion of our grievances and an invitation to unite in humble, decent 
and loyal addresses to the throne for redress; .... there- 
fore this Assembly, instead of treating that letter with any degree 
of contempt, think themselves obliged with duty to themselves and 
to their country, to approve the sentiments contained in them." 

On July 17, 1769, six years before the battle of Bunker Hill, the 
British sloop of war Liberty brought into Newport two Connec- 
ticut vessels charged with smuggling. The people obliged the 
captain of the sloop and all his men to go ashore, ostensibly to give 
an account of themselves for firing unnecessarily upon a brig 
which was one of the prizes and maltreating its captain. They 
then in the evening boarded the vessel, ran her ashore, cut away 
the mast and scuttled her. "This," says Arnold, "was the first 
overt act of violence offered to the British authorities in America." 

While Lieut. Duddingston of the Gaspee was harassing the 
people and interfering with the coastwise trade, the people of 
Providence complained to Deputy Governor Sessions. He con- 
sulted Chief Justice Hopkins as to the rights of the people and re- 
ceived the following judicial opinion: "No commander of any vessel 
has any right to use any authority in the body of the colony without 
previously applying to the Governor and showing his warrant for 
so doing." 

Governor Sessions communicated the complaint which he 
had received from the Providence people with the judge's opinion 
to Governor Wanton, who immediately sent the High Sheriff 
on board the Gaspee with a letter to the commanding officer, 
requiring him to produce his commission and instructions. Dud- 
dingston sent an arrogant reply to the governor and enclosed the 
correspondence to Admiral Montague at Boston. The Admiral 



66 

addressed what Arnold calls an "extremely insolent" reply to the 
Governor "defending the conduct of Duddingston, ridiculing the 
Governor and threatening in case the rescue of any prize was at- 
tempted, to hang as pirates the parties concerned." This was the 
same Admiral Montague who raised quite a "shindy," as the boys 
say, because the Newport forts did not salute him on his arrival 
in America; and who, on the night of the Boston Tea Party, put 
his head out of the window, exclaiming, "You will have to pay the 
fiddler for this dance," receiving the merry retort from the crowd, 
"Come out now and we'll give you a payment on account right 
here!" 

Governor Wanton's reply to the above-mentioned letter was of 
more formal wording, though embodying the same spirit as that of 
the roystering Bostonians. It ran: "I do not receive instructions 
for the administration of my government from the King's admiral 
stationed in America." 

THE INITIATIVE IN CALLING A CONGRESS. 

In 1774, it was apparent that concerted action on the part of 
the colonies in some more formal way was necessary and the 
Continental Congress was arranged. It had been talked of in the 
papers and in addresses for a long time, but according to Mr. 
'Arnold no formal proposition was made by any legally constituted 
authority until the freemen of Providence in town meeting passed 
a resolution containing the following: "That the deputies of this 
town be requested to use their influence at the approaching session 
of the General Assembly of this colony for promoting a Congress 
as soon as may be of the representatives of the General Assemblies 
of the several colonies and provinces of North America, for estab- 
lishing the firmest Union," etc. "We claim, therefore, for Rhode 
Island," says Arnold, "the distinguished honor of making the first 
explicit movement for a General Congress, and a few weeks later 



67 

her Legislature was also the very first to elect delegates to that 
Congress." 

Judge Durfee said "Rhode Island was among the first to adopt 
the Articles of Confederation, and it may be added she was the 
last to abandon them." 

INITIATIVE BY THE WOMEN. 

It is inter estingN to note in this connection that while organi- 
zations under the name of Sons of Liberty were formed in all the 
colonies, "We believe," says Arnold, "that to Rhode Island is re- 
served the peculiar honor of initiating a similar order composed 
of the gentler sex, known as Daughters of Liberty. Its origin is 
ascribed to Dr. Ephraim Bowen, at whose house, on March 4th, 
1776, eighteen young ladies, belonging to prominent families in 
Providence, assembled by invitation employing the time from sun- 
rise till evening in spinning." 

What these sprightly damsels of 1766 were engaged in spin- 
ning, you their great-grand-daughters may surmise. Arnold says: 
"They resolved to purchase no more British manufactures, unless 
the stamp act should be repealed, and adopted other resolutions, 
perhaps more patriotic than prudent. . . . They were hand- 
somely entertained by the doctor at dinner, but cheerfully agreed 
to omit tea at the evening meal, to render their conduct yet more 
consistent." 

THE INITIATIVE IN THE WAR. 

The Battle of Lexington was fought April 19, 1775; next day 
1,000 men were on the march from Providence to Boston but they 
were stopped by despatches from Lexington. The Rhode Island 
General Assembly met the next day and the colony was aggressive 
in warlike preparation. The Providence artillery and the fusileer 
companies were united under one charter, under which the present 
Providence United Train of Artillery was established. 



68 

On May 3d, 1775, the boldest act of legislation recorded in 
any of the colonies up to this time, so Mr. Arnold says, "was now 
performed by the Rhode Island Assembly in suspending Governor 
Wanton from the office of governor to which he had just been 
elected for the seventh time." 

The Rhode Island soldiers in the revolution were not only 
among the first to respond, but were apparently best prepared. 
Washington Irving in his Life of Washington said: 

"In riding through the camp, Washington observed that nine 
thousand of the troops belonged to Massachusetts; the rest were 
from other provinces. They were encamped in separate bodies, 
each with its own regulations, and officers of its own appointment. 
Some had tents, others were in barracks, and others sheltered them- 
selves as best they might. Many were sadly in want of clothing, 
and all, said Washington, were strongly imbued with the spirit of 
insubordination, which they mistook for independence. 

One of the encampments, however, was in striking contrast 
with the rest, and might vie with those of the British for order 
and exactness. Here were tents and marqees pitched in the Eng- 
lish style; soldiers well drilled and well equipped; everything had 
an air of discipline and subordination. It was a body of Rhode 
Island troops, which had been raised, drilled and brought to the 
camp by Brigadier General Greene of that province, whose sub- 
sequent renown entitles him to an introduction to the reader." 

Henry Cabot Lodge said: "One day Rhode Island demanded 
a navy and after much struggle vessels were authorized. Then 
came the cold fit again. Nothing must be done to irritate England 
or spoil the chances of the petition, so no prize courts were es- 
tablished, no ports were opened and New Hampshire when every- 
thing depended upon New England, was kept waiting a month for 
authority to establish an independent government." 



69 

Arnold's history says that "the first gun fired upon the ocean 
at any part of His Majesty's navy in the American Revolution" was 
discharged from a sloop under Captain Abraham Whipple, June 
15, 1775, two days before the Battle of Bunker Hill, against a 
tender of the British frigate "Rose." "This," said Mr. Arnold, "was 
the beginning of a glorious national era in the naval enterprise of 
Rhode Island," The afifair led to the correspondence between 
Captain Whipple and Captain Wallace of the Rose, which con- 
tained the following repartee: "You, Abraham Whipple, on the 
loth of June, 1772, burned His Majesty's vessel, the Gaspee, and I 
will hang you at the yard-arm. (Signed) James Wallace." An- 
swered as follows: "To Sir James Wallace, Sir: Always catch a 
man before you hang him. (Signed) Abraham Whipple." 

THE INITIATIVE IN SLAVERY AND IN ABOLITION. 

While Rhode Island was not the first offender against liberty 
in the importation of slaves, it must be confessed that one portion 
of the colony was actively engaged in the slave trade. There were 
both white and colored slaves in colonial times. To the credit of 
the people as a whole be it said, however, that the General Assem- 
bly of Rhode Island was among the first of law-making bodies 
to pronounce its edict against the cruel traffic. Arnold says the 
highest honor belongs to Massachusetts for its anti-slavery enact- 
ment of November 4th, 1646 — the first in all the world; but he 
claims the second for Rhode Island, for the act passed by the 
General Assembly convened at Warwick in 1652, which he trans- 
cribes as follows: 

"Whereas, there is a common course practiced amongst Eng- 
lish men to buy negers, to that end they may have them for ser- 
vice or slaves forever ; for the preventinge of such practices among 
us, let it be ordered, that no blacke mankind or white being 
forced by covenant bond, or otherwise to serve any man or his as- 



70 

sighnes longer than ten yeares, or untill they come to bee twentie 
four yeares of age, if they bee taken in under fourteen, from the 
time of their cominge within the liberties of this Colonie. And at 
the end or terme of ten yeares to sett them free, as the manner is 
with the English servants." 

THE INITIATIVE IN THE WAR FOR THE UNION. 

I have detained you too long to attempt to set forth the 
details of Rhode Island's initiative in the struggle for the preser- 
vation of the Union. 

I think you all know that Rhode Island was the first state to 
offer her services to the Federal Government; and this long before 
the flag on Sumpter had been lowered. But in order to make this 
part clear I read from Woodbury's Campaign of the ist Rhode 
Island Regiment: 

"This offer of troops was made to Mr. Buchanan, who saw fit 
to reject it. It was afterwards made to Mr. Lincoln. On the 12th 
of January, 1861, Secretary (of State) Bartlett wrote to the Secre- 
tary of War, that Rhode Island would do its utmost to assist the 
Government. January 15th, Col. William Goddard, of the Govern- 
or's staff, reached Washington, with the tender of 1,000 men and 
a battery of light artillery, and was favorably received by General 
Scott. January nth, the legislature of the State of New York 
voted to tender the whole military power of the State to the presi- 
dent. January i8th, the legislature of Massachusetts passed a 
similar vote. January i6th. Major General Sandford, of New York 
city, tendered a division of 7,000 men." 

The First Rhode Island Infantry left Providence for Washing- 
ton, April 20, 1861. It is claimed that this was the first regiment to 
arrive at Washington fully equipped for service in the field. This 
was eight days after the attack on Fort Sumpter and five days 
after the President's call for volunteers. Adjutant General Sackett 



71 

was in this regiment. He has told me that on their arrival they 
found other troops encamped, but Ben Perley Poor, in his Life 
of General Burnside, said: 

"The Eighth Massachusetts Volunteers and the Seventh of 
New York, had reached there previously, and the sturdy mechanics 
of the Massachusetts Eighth had reconstructed the disabled rail- 
way between Annapolis and the Junction; but the First Rhode 
Island Regiment, which reached Washington on the morning of 
the 26th of April was the first organization that had arrived com- 
pletely uniformed, armed, and supplied with provisions and ammu- 
nition for a three weeks campaign." 

And now, my friends, let us close behind us the portals of the 
storied past and look forward to the war-stained standards of our 
people, now garlanded with victory and peace, but still pressing 
forward in the struggle for freedom's deathless cause. 

What lofty initiative shall the patriots of peace put forth for 
freedom, — freedom to work and to aspire and to compete for 
honor and for wealth, every man on equal terms according to his 
merits and abilities? Misfortune and distress, the unsolvable 
perplexities of misery oppress and dishearten, but a fair consider- 
ation of the improving conditions of mankind as time goes on, 
must give us hope; and an acquaintance with the youthful or par- 
ental antecedents of those who have won out in life's struggle 
cannot but inspire us to a renewed confidence that the Declaration 
of Independence, after all, rings true. 

Fame still has her laurels for him who helps his fellow man 
and "Peace hath her victories as well as war." Rhode Island 
boasts of its industries, its wealth and its culture, but the honor of 
Rhode Island demands that the condition of its working common- 
people shall advance with its material prosperity ; that as prosperity 
increases learning shall become deeper, human sympathy kindlier, 
religion broader and charity more munificent. 



72 

The modern patriot shall be he who, in self-devotion and self- 
abnegation, shall reconsecrate the free soil of this most liberal of 
commonwealths by another potent initiative in freedom's cause. 

"In the long vista of the years to roll 
Let me not see my country's honor fade, 

Oh! Let me see our land retain its soul, 

Her pride in freedom and not Freedom's shade !" 
I (Keats.) 




CHARLES WARREN LIPPITT 

GOVERNOR OF RHODE ISLAND 189S-1897 



The Rhode Island 
Declaration of Independence* 

BY 

Hon. CHARLES WARREN LIPPITT 

GOVERNOR OF RHODE ISLAND 

1895-1897 



This celebration to-day is undoubtedly the first formal public 
recognition of the anniversary of the Rhode Island Declaration of 
Independence. In the northern part of the State the efforts of a 
single citizen, James S. Slater, have annually for several years 
directed attention to this important occasion. The National Society 
of Colonial Dames of America in Rhode Island, and the Bristol 
Chapter of the Rhode Island Society of the Sons of the American 
Revolution, have also held their annual meetings on May fourth, 
for a number of years, in honor of this anniversary. 

The adjustment of this question is not between ourselves and 
our enemies. On the contrary, we now engage in friendly exam- 
ination of official records to ascertain which colony was foremost 
in such formal action against the encroachments of parliament as 
to constitute separation from Great Britain. If any other colony 
substantiates, by unquestionable facts, claims prior to ours, how- 
ever sad il may be to yield our position, let us remember it is 
relinquished to our friends and fellow countrymen. 

It is our duty to determine if the honor of the first colonial 
declaration of independence rightfully belongs to the people who 
occupied these Plantations in Revolutionary times. We would 

*The following extract, taken from a pamphlet entitled, "The Rhode Is- 
land Declaration of Independence May 4, 1776," copyright 1907 by Charles 
Warren Lippitt, is reprinted by permission of the author with all rights re- 
served. 



74 

indeed be recreant descendants if we did not claim, substantiate, 
and perpetuate, the rightful honor of our ancestors. 

May 31, 1775, a committee of the county of Mecklenburg met 
at Charlottestown and passed a preamble and twenty resolutions. 
They are entirely concerned with the affairs of that county and do 
not declare themselves in favor of independence, or renounce alle- 
giance to Great Britain. They represent a commendable effort to 
maintain order and preserve the peace of their community, during 
the interval between the failure of the representatives of Great 
Britain to conduct the government, and satisfactory arrangements 
for some other acceptable authority to accomplish that object, as 
the following resolution declares: 

" XVIII. That these Resolves be in full force and virtue, until 
instructioiis from the Provincial Congress, regulating the juris- 
prudence of the province, shall provide otherwise, or the legislative 
body of Great Britain, resign its unjust and arbitrary pretentions 
with respect to America." 

The resolutions of a county do not control a state, and the 
provisions arranged for Mecklenburg applied only to that county, 
and were not binding on any other. 

After these resolutions had been adopted, published in several 
newspapers, and copies forwarded to the authorities in Great 
Britain, by some unfortunate circumstances they were entirely 
overlooked and forgotten. It was not until Mr. Peter Force, the 
compiler of the "American Archives," announced in the National 
Intelligencer of December 18, 1838, over sixty-three years later, his 
discovery in the "New York Journal," June 29, 1775, and subse- 
quently in the "Massachusetts Spy," of July 12, of that year, par- 
tial copies of these resolutions, that they again came to light. A 
copy of the entire series was subsequently found in the year 1847 in 
a copy of the "South Carolina Gazette," June 13, 1775. Later Mr. 
Bancroft, Minister of the United States at London, found an entire 



75 

series of the Mecklenburg Resolutions of May 31st, 1775, in the 
British State Paper Office, as published in the South Carolina 
Gazette of June 13, 1775. The copy of this paper was forwarded to 
the British Secretary of State by the colonial governor of Georgia in 
1775, that " His Lordship might see the extraordinary resolves of 
the people of Charlottestown in Mecklenburg County." 

On the 30th of June, 1775, Governor Martin of North Carolina 
also forwarded a copy to the British Secretary of State. 

On Friday, April 30, 1819, a little short of 44 years after 
these events in Mecklenburg County, the "Raleigh Register and 
North Carolina Gazette " published an article calling attention to a 
Declaration of Independence made by the citizens of Mecklenburg 
County in North Carolina on May 20, 1775, eleven days before the 
meeting of May 31st referred to above. This document claims 
that the citizens of Mecklenburg, which then included the present 
county of Gabarrus, inspired by the occurrences in Massachusetts, 
organized themselves to protect their inalienable rights and liberties. 
On May 19, 1775, a meeting was held composed of two delegates 
from each military company in the county. They were vested with 
unlimited powers. The news of the battle of Lexington arrived 
on the day the meeting assembled. After a long discussion of the 
objects for which they had convened, a series of resolutions was 
unanimously enacted. The declaration, which has attracted so much 
attention, is contained in the second and third of these resolutions, 
as follows: 

"2. Resolved, That we the citizens of Mecklenburg County, do 
hereby dissolve the political bonds which have connected us to the 
Mother Country, and hereby absolve ourselves from our allegiance 
to the British Crown, and abjure all political connection, contract 
or association with that Nation, who have wantonly trampled on our 
rights and liberties— and inhumanely shed the innocent blood of 
American patriots at Lexington." 



76 

3- Resolved, That we do hereby declare ourselves a free and 
independent People, are and of right ought to be, a sovereign and 
self governing Association, under thecontrol of no power other than 
that of our God and the General Government of the Congress; to 
the maintenance of which independence, we solemnly pledge to 
each other our mutual co-operation, our lives, our fortunes, and 
our most sacred honor." 

These resolutions from time to time have attracted considerable 
attention. No contemporary evidence of their authenticity has yet 
been discovered. The action of the supposed meeting of May 19th 
and 20th, 1775, rests upon the memory of certain citizens of Meck- 
lenburg County who put them in writing, after the long period of 
time referred to, from their recollection of the proceedings of the 
meeting. 

Both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were alive in 1819, 
at the time the Mecklenburg Resolutions of May 20, 1775, were 
published in the " Raleigh Register and North Carolina Gazette." 
Their intimate acquaintance with the circumstances attending the 
formation of the American nation in 1775 developed a keen interest 
in the subject. A copy of the Mecklenburg Resolutions was for- 
warded to Mr. Jefferson by Mr. Adams in a letter dated June 22, 
18 19. Mr, Jefferson replied in a communication to Mr. Adams 
dated July 9, 1819, in which he refers to many of the actors and 
the events of the time when these supposed resolutions first ap- 
peared, and discredits their authenticity from his general knowledge 
of all the circumstances. Mr. Adams in two letters to the Rev. 
William Eentley, one dated the 15th of July and one the 21st of 
August, 1819, unqualifiedly joined in the position taken by Mr. 
Jefferson. In the last of the two letters, Mr. Adams states: 

" 4. Is it possible that such resolutions should have escaped 
the vigilant attention of the scrutinizing, penetrating minds of 
Patrick Henry, R. H. Lee, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Gadsden, Mr. Rut- 



77 

ledge, Mr. Jay, Mr, Sherman, Mr. Samuel Adams, Hand credo. I 
can not believe that they were known to one member of Congress 
on the fourth of July, 1776." 

It has also been possible to secure two letters of Mr. John 
Adams, not heretofore published, expressing in most emphatic 
terms his condemnation of the Mecklenburg Resolutions of May 
20, 1775 (Exhibit A)*. It is evident that neither Mr. Jefferson 
nor Mr. Adams had any faith in the correctness of the Mecklen- 
burg Declaration of Independence of May 20, 1775. 

Four of the reputed signers of the Mecklenburg Declaration 
of May 20, 1775, were Thomas Polk, John McKnitt Alexander, 
John Pfifer, and Waightstill Avery. These gentlemen, with two 
others, represented the county of Mecklenburg in the Third Provin- 
cial Congress of North Carolina, that met on the 21st of August, 
1775. On the 23rd of August, a committee of the Congress reported 
a so-called test, to substantiate the loyalty and patriotism of the 
members of the Congress, which reads as follows : 

" We, the subscribers. Professing our Allegiance to the 
King, and Acknowledging the Constitutional Executive 
Power of Government, do solemnly profess, testify, and declare 
that we do absolutely believe that neither the Parliament of Great 
Britain nor any member or constituent branch thereof have a right 
to impose taxes upon these Colonies to regulate the internal policy 
thereof: and that all attempts by fraud or force to establish and 
exercise such claims and powers are violations of the peace and 
security of the people, and ought to be resisted to the utmost," etc. 

" In testimony whereof we have hereto set our hands, this 
23rd of August, 1775." 

Gentlemen of courage, honor and integrity, willing to risk 
their lives and their property in the cause of American liberty, 
could not on the 20th of May, 1775, have pledged themselves to the 
so-called Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence, and a little 

*See foot note at end of address. 



78 

over three months afterward in the presence of the delegates of 
North Carolina assembled in the Third Provincial Congress have 
willingly subscribed to the above test, which was signed by the four 
delegates from Mecklenburg County, as well as by all of the other 
members of said Congress. 

In addition the delegates from Mecklenburg County joined with 
the other members of the Congress in unanimously adopting an 
address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain, pledging themselves 
in most vehement language as loyal subjects of His Majesty, 
King George the Third, as the following extract proves (Exhibit D). 

"These expressions flow from an affection bordering upon 
devotion to the succession of the house of Hanover as by law es- 
tablished, from Subjects who view it as a Monument that does 
honor to human nature; a Monument capable of teaching Kings 
how glorious it is to reign over a free People. These are the heart 
felt effusions of Men ever ready to spend their Blood and Treas- 
ure when constitutionally called upon, in support of the succession 
of His Majesty King George the third, his Crown and dignity, and 
who fervently wish to Transmit his Reign to future ages as the 
Ord of common happiness to his people. Could these our Senti- 
ments reach the Throne, surely our Sovereign would forbid the 
horrors of War and desolation to intrude into this once peaceful 
and happy Land, and would stop that deluge of human Blood 
which now threatens to overflow this Colony, Blood too precious 
to be shed but in a common cause against the common enemy of 
Great Britain and her sons. 

"This declaration we hold forth as a Testimony of Loyalty to 
our Sovereign, and Affection to our parent State, and as a sincere 
earnest of our present and future intentions." 

It is equally impossible to believe that these gentlemen could 
have joined in enacting the supposed Mecklenburg Resolutions of 
May 20, 1775, and on September 8, 1775, have formally bound 
themselves by the unusually explicit protestations and statements 



79 

of the address to the Inhabitants of Great Britain. Such action is 
entirely irreconcilable with the approval of the supposed Mecklen- 
burg Declaration of Independence of May 20, 1775, but is not 
incompatible with the authentic Mecklenburg Resolutions of May 

31, 1775- 

The Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence has been most 
completely and critically examined and discussed in an article in 
the North American Review for April, 1874, by Mr. James C. 
Welling, that abundantly proves from the official records of North 
Carolina, and other equally authoritative sources, that the sup- 
posed Mecklenburg meeting of May 20, 1775, and the resolutions 
claimed to have been adopted thereat, never occured, but that these 
circumstances were confused with the authentic resolutions passed 
at the meeting actually held on May 31, 1775. 

James Fiske, in the American Revolution, characterizes the 
Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence as a " legend." Froth- 
ingham, after a careful investigation, states that he has not met 
with any contemporary reference in manuscript or in print to 
prove the existence of the convention or the public meeting which 
is said to have passed these resolutions. 

Some recent claims in behalf of the Mecklenburg meeting of 
May 20th, 1775, have been carefully investigated by A. S. Salley, 
Jr., in a pamphlet published in Columbia, South Carolina, 1905, 
conclusively proving that the supposed declaration of independence 
of May 20th, 1775, has been undoubtedly mistaken for the authentic 
Mecklenburg resolutions on May 31st, 1775, which are not claimed 
to be a declaration of independence. 

Notwithstanding the active warfare existing during the greater 
part of 177s, the colonists still entertained a strong feeling of de- 
pendence upon the mother country. It was apparently expected 
that after a short conflict Great Britain would recognize their rights 
and enable them to continue as English colonists, in the enjoyment 



80 

of liberties they were not willing to relinquish. Ultimate independ- 
ence had not been favorably considered by the mass of the col- 
onists. I'lie fear that it might be attempted induced severel colonial 
governments to protest against such action. 

Pennsylvania was one of the most conservative of the colonies. 
Her poeple were unable to contemplate final separation from Great 
Britain. To prevent such a possibility, her General Assembly, 
November 9, 1775, instructed the State delegation in Continental 
Congress, as follows : 

" Though the oppressive Measures of the British Parliament 
and Administration have compelled us to resist their violence by 
Force of Arms, yet we strictly enjoin you that you in behalf of this 
Colony dissent from, and utterly reject, any Propositions, should 
such be made, that may cause or lead to, a Separation from our 
Mother Country or a change of the Form of this Government. 
You are directed to make Report of your Proceedings to this 
House." . . . 

The sentiment of Pennsylvania naturally reflected itself in 
New Jersey, and the Provincial Congress and Council of Safety 
of the Colony, on the 28th of November, 1775, took the following 
action in relation to independence. 

" The House took into consideration the inquiry had yesterday, 
touching the Petitions presented to this House; and it appearing 
from the Petitioners of the City of Burlington, who were called 
in and heard, that they signed the same from reports that some 
men affected independency, and being alarmed at such sentiments, 
they were induced to present the Petition, hoping that the House 
would discourage such sentiments by their Resolutions; whereupon, 
the several Petitions being read the second time, 

" I Resolved, That reports of Independency, in the appre- 
hension of this House, are groundless. 

" 2. Resolved, That it be recommended to the Delegates of 
the Colony to use their utmost endeavors for the obtaining a 



81 

redress of American grievances, and for restoring the union between 
the Colonies and Great Britain, upon constitutional principles. 

" 3. Resolved, That the said Delegates be directed not to give 
their assent to, but utterly to reject any propositions, if such should 
be made, that may separate this Colony from the Mother Country, 
or change the form of Government thereof." 

Maryland entertained similar conservative sentiments. The 
convention of the state assembled December 7, 1775. Undoubtedly 
reflecting the opinion of a considerable majority of her people, it 
placed upon its journal a declaration 

" That the people of this province, strongly attached to the 
English constitution, and truly sensible of the blessings they have 
derived from it, warmly impressed with sentiments of affection 
for, and loyalty to, the house of Hanover, connected with the Brit- 
ish nation by the ties of blood and interest, and being thoroughly 
convinced, that to be free subjects of the king of Great Britain, 
with all its consequences, is to be the freest members of any civil 
society in the known world, never did, nor do entertain any views 
or desires of independency." 

" Thai as they consider their union with the mother country 
upon term.s that may insure to them a permanent freedom, as their 
highest felicity, so would they view the fatal necessity of separat- 
ing from her, as a misfortune next to the greatest that can befall 
them." (Exhibit B.) 

Intimately associated with these commonwealths by proximity 
and business connections, New York took a similar position. Her 
provincial congress on the 14th, of December, 1775, "Resolved, 
That it is the opinion of this Congress that none of the people of 
this colony have withdrawn their allegiance from His Majesty. 
That the turbulent state of this colony arises not from a desire to 
become independent of the British Crown, but solely from the 
oppressive Acts of the British Parliament, devised for enslaving 

6 



82 

His Majesty's liege subjects in the American colonies, and the 
hostile attempts of the ministry to carry these Acts into execution." 

Delaware joined her neighbors in the opposition to independ- 
ence and instructed its delegates in the Continental Congress to 
promote reconciliation. (Exhibit C.) North Carolina took a 
stronger position. Her third Provincial Congress 'unanimously 
adopted, September 8th, 1775, an "Address to the Inhabitants of 
the British Empire, previously herein noticed.'" containing the fol- 
lowing clauses : 

" We have been told that Independence is our object; that we 
seek to sljake off connection with the parent State. Cruel Sugges- 
tion! Do not all our professions, all our actions, uniformly 
contradict this?" 

" We again declare, and we invoke that Almighty Being who 
searches the Recesses of the human heart, and knows our most 
secret Intentions, that it is our most earnest wish and prayer to be 
restored with the other United Colonies, to the State in which we 
and they were placed before the year 1763, disposed to glance over 
any Regulations which Britain had made previous to this, and 
which seem to be injurious and oppressive to these Colonies, hoping 
that at some future day she will benignly interpose and remove 
from us every cause of complaint." (Exhibit D.) 

Even in New England such ideas prevailed. Portsmouth, 
New Hampshire, December 25, 1775, instructed its delegates in 
the State Provincial Congress against the formation of a local 
government, fearing that such action would provide their enemies 
"with arguments to persuade the good people that we are aiming 
at independence, which we decidedly disavow." 

The necessity of providing for those portions of the country, 
not in actual control of the English, forms of government to main- 
tain public order forced action of a temporary character in some 
of the colonies. January 5, 1776, the Provincial Congress of New 



83 

Hampshire enacted a form of government to continue during the 
present unhappy and unnatural contest with Great Britain. The 
preamble makes the usual recital, and closes as follows: 

" Protesting and Declaring that we never sought to throw 
off our Dependency upon Great Britain, but felt ourselves happy 
under her Protection, while we could enjoy our Constitutional 
Rights and Privileges. — ^And that we shall rejoice if such a recon- 
ciliation between us and our Parent State can be effected as shall 
be approved by the Continental Congress, in whose prudence and 
Wisdom we confied." 

Seven colonies, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jer- 
sey and New York, compactly situated in the centre of the country, 
North Carolina in the south and New Hampshire in the north, all 
protested against independence. A majority of the thirteen col- 
onies, therefore, as late as March, 1776, stood opposed to any 
separation from the mother country. 

The fourth Provincial Congress of North Carolina met at Hal- 
ifax, April 4th, 1776, and was in session until May 14th, 1776. A 
committee reported to the congress, on April 12th a suitable pre- 
amble reciting the prevailing conditions between the colonies and the 
mother country, and one resolution, as follows : 

"Resolved: That the delegates for this Colony in the Conti- 
nental Congress be empowered to concur with the delegates of the 
other Colonies in declaring independence, and forming foreign alli- 
ances, reserving to this Colony the sole and exclusive right of 
forming a constitution and laws for this Colony, and of appointing 
delegates from time to time (under, the direction of a general 
representation thereof), to meet the delegates of the other Col- 
onies for such purposes as shall be hereafter pointed out." (Ex- 
hibit E.) 

After consideration the report was unanimously adopted by the 
congress. The delegates attending the congress represented about 



84 

three-fourths of the colony. The resolution confines itself entirely 
to instructions to the delegates of North Carolina in the Continen- 
tal Congress. It does not decree that on and after its passage the 
colony of North Carolina shall be free and independent of the 
Kingdom of Great Britain. The legal and actual condition of North 
Carolina was precisely the same after this resolution was passed 
as before it was offered. As an indication of the patriotic sen- 
timents and intentions of a portion of the people of North Carolina, 
it is unquestionably commendable. It can not in any way be re- 
garded as severing the connection between England and the colony 
of North Carolina. 

The North Carolina resolution does not stand in the same 
degree with the action of the Rhode Island General Assembly in 
September, 1765, over ten years prior to the passage of said reso- 
lution. At that time, the Rhode Island Assembly passed a series 
of resolutions as follows: 

Rhode Island Resolves on the Stamp Act, 
September 16, 1765. 

"This Assembly, taking into the most serious consideration, 
an act passed by the Parliament of Great Britain, at their last ses- 
sion for levying stamp duties, and other internal duties, in North 
America, do resolve, — 

" I. That the first adventurers, settlers of this. His Majesty's 
colony and dominion of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, 
brought with them and transmitted to their posterity, and all other 
His Majesty's subjects since inhabiting this, His Majesty' colony, 
all the privileges and immunities that have at any time been held, 
enjoyed, and possessed by the people of Great Britain. 

" 2. That by a charter granted by King Charles the Second, 
m the fifteenth year of his reign, the colony, aforesaid, is declared 



85 

and entitled to all the privileges and immunities of natural born 
subjects, to all intents and purposes, as if they had been abiding 
and born within the realm of England. 

" 3. That His Majesty's liege people of this colony have en- 
joyed the right of being governed by their own Assembly, in the 
article of taxes and internal police ; and that the same hath never 
been forfeited, or any other way yielded up ; but hath been con- 
stantly recognized by the King and people of Britain. 

" 4. That, therefore, the General Assembly of this colony 
have, in their representative capacity, the only exclusive right to 
levy taxes and imposts upon the inhabitants of this colony ; and 
that every attempt to vest such power in any person or persons, 
whatever, other than the General Assembly, aforesaid, is unconsti- 
tutional, and hath a manifest tendency to destroy the liberties of 
the people of this colony. 

" 5. That His Majesty's liege people, the inhabitants of this 
colony, are not bound to yield obedience to any law or ordinance 
designed to impose any internal taxation whatsoever upon them, 
other than the laws or ordinances of the General Assembly, 
aforesaid. 

" 6. That all the officers in this colony, appointed by the au- 
thority thereof, be, and they are hereby, directed to proceed in the 
execution of their respective offices in the same manner as usual ; 
and that this Assembly will indemnify and save harmless all the 
said officers on account of their conduct, agreeably to this resolu- 
tion." — (Rhode Island Colonial Records, 1757-1769, v. 6, pp. 
451-452.) 

These Rhode Island resolutions were characterized by Judge 
Staples as " little short of a declaration of entire independence of 
the British government." 

Prof. Gammell states : " These resolutions taken as a whole, are 
nearly equivalent to a declaration of independence." 



86 

The action of the Rhode Island legislature, taking effect from 
and after its passage, placed the colony in a position, in defense of 
the liberties and rights of its people, entirely different from the 
action of North Carolina. Rhode Island enacted a law not depend- 
ent upon the action of any future body, not postponing the time in 
which its action should become effective to a distant period, or per- 
mitting it to rest upon the contingency of the action of another 
legislative body; but then and there, in plain, unmistakable lan- 
guage, the colony refused to abide by the act of the English Parlia- 
ment, denied the right of that body to impose such taxes, and au- 
thorized its" official representatives to ignore all laws in relation to 
the vexed question of the Stamp Act except those enacted by the 
Rhode Island legislature. It also assumed, without equivocation, 
the antagonistic and, so to speak, rebellious position of protecting 
its own officers against the power of England in consequence of 
any action they might take in executing the mandates of the colony 
of Rhode Island. 

May 1st, 1776, the province of Massachusetts Bay, passed 
"an act for establishing the stile of commissions which shall 
..hereafter be issued, and for altering the stile of writs, 

processes^ and ALL LAW PROCEEDINGS, WITHIN THIS COLONY; 
AND FOR DIRECTING HOW RECOGNIZANC(e)s TO THE USE OF THIS 
GOVERNMENT, SHALL, FOR THE FUTURE, BE TAKEN AND PROSE-i 

CUTED." (Exhibit F.) 

The preamble recites the grievances of the colony against the 
King of Great Britain. 

The bill provides that certain changes shall be made in the legal 
papers named, as follows : 

First, That the name and style of the King of Great Britain, 
France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc., shall be changed 
to the name and style of the Government and People of the Massa- 
chusetts Bay in New England. 



87 

Second, That they shall be dated in the year of the Christian 
era, and shall not bear the date of the year of the reign of any 
king or queen of Great Britain. 

Third, That the money recovered and levied upon recogni- 
zances or any suits upon recognizances, shall be paid into the 
treasury of the colony for the use and benefit thereof. 

Fourth, Three sections of the act, the 2d, 5th, and 6th, particu- 
larly specify that they shall not take eflfect until June first, 1776, 
thirty days after the bill was passed. 

At the close of the second section, which is perhaps the most 
important of all in the act, the following limitations of the enact- 
ments therein contained are incorporated : 

First, " Until some recommendation of the American congress," 

Second, "Or act, order, or resolve, of a general American 
legislature," 

Third, "Or of the legislature of this colony," 
shall be made and passed, otherwise directing and prescribing. 

Certain commissions, civil and military, previously issued, are 
continued in force by section 3, until September 19, 1776, and sec- 
tion 4 provides that said commissions may be made conformable 
to the style and date of this act. 

The bill does not repeal any of the acts of allegiance then exist- 
ing in the statutes of Massachusetts, nor in any way abrogate the 
provisions regarding allegiance in the charter of Massachusetts, 
the fundamental law of the colony. The limitation clauses clearly 
anticipate that the act was not to be permanent and that it almost 
inevitably would be superseded by acts of legislative bodies then 
in existence or likely to be formed. Nothing it contains justifies 
the claim that by the passage of this act the colony of Massachusetts 
had severed her connection with Great Britain to take effect on and 
after its passage, or on June first, 1776. 



This act was under consideration by the Massachusetts general 
legislature for the greater part of the month of April, and was dis- 
cussed, amended, and otherwise considered by a conference of the 
two houses before it was passed on May first, 1776. 

Contemporary evidence clearly indicates that this bill was not 
considered even in spirit to formally renounce all allegiance. 

John Winthrop, a prominent member of the Massachusetts 
Provincial Congress, in a letter, dated Watertown, April 1776, to 
John Adams, states: 

. . . . " Our people are impatiently waiting for the Congress 
to declare off from Great Britain. If they should not do it pretty 
soon, I am not sure but this colony will do it for themselves. Pray, 
how would such a step be relished by the Congress? Would they 
approve of it? or would they think it too precipitate? Would it 
endanger the breaking the union of the colonies? These are very 
important questions, and I shall be extremely glad to know your 
sentiments upon them." . . . 

Mr. Adams replies as follows, on May 6th, 1776: 

. . . . " Our people, you say, are impatiently waiting for the 
Congress to declare off from Great Britain. What my own senti- 
ments are upon the question is not material. But others ask to 
what purpose should we declare off. Our privateers are at liberty, 
our trade is open, the colonies are sliding into new governments, 
a confederation may be formed; but why should we declare we 
never will be reconciled to Great Britain again upon any terms what- 
soever? 

" You ask how it could be relished by the Congress, if our 
colony should declare off. I am happy to hear that our colony is 
disusing a certain name in all commissions, acts, and law processes, 
and I should like very well if they would choose a governor, or at 
least ask leave of Congress to do it; but I can not advise them to 
make any public declarations separate from our sister col- 
onies." . . . 



89 

On June ist, 1776, when three sections of the act in question 
became a law, D,r. Winthrop repHes to Mr, Adams, after treating 
of several other matters, as follows: 

" The style of commissions, law processes, etc., is altered by an 
act, and instead of George the Third, it is to be 'The Government 
and People of the Massachusetts Bay.' " 

The Boston newspapers naturally gave much space to the pro- 
ceedings of the Massachusetts legislature and printed maoy acts 
in full, yet neither the New England Chronicle in either of its five 
editions for May 1776, nor the Continental Journal of May 30th, 
1776, the first number issued, makes any reference to this act of 
May first, 1776. Each of these newspapers is on file in the Boston 
Athenaeum. Neither of the four editions of the Boston Gazette 
for May, 1776, which was printed at Watertown, where the Massa- 
chusetts assembly was in session, makes any reference to this act. 

The colonial newspapers at that time did not deem the act of 
sufficient importance to print. An examination of the files of some 
prominent English newspapers of 1776 indicates that it was not 
noticed in those publications. 

Bancroft states, " On the first day of May, 1776, Massachusetts 
expunged the regal style from all public proceedings, and substi- 
tuted the name of her government and people." That was all the 
act accomplished. 

The sentiments of Rhode Island in relation to taxation and in- 
dependence were much more decided than those of the other col- 
onies. In 1732-33 the colony petitioned the House of Commons 
against the Sugar Act, then pending before that body, and therein 
Rhode Island first proclaimed the principle that afterward became 
the war-cry of the Revolution: "No Taxation without Representa- 
tion." Her people unquestionably committed the first overt acts in 
connection with the Revolution. The attack upon the St. John in 
1764, followed soon after by the burning of the Maidstone's boat on 



90 

the common at Newport, in 1765, and the capture and destruction in 
Newport Harbor in 1769 of the King's armed sloop Liberty, indi- 
cated the feeling of the people concerning the oppressive measures 
of Great Britain. The State was fortunate in her leaders. Gover- 
nor Ward, years before the question of independence was generally 
discussed, had foreseen the probabilities, and as early as 1766, in 
writing to his son, said: "These colonies are destined to an early 
independence, and you will live to see my words verified." 

In the troubled times of the Stamp Act, Bancroft states : "The 
Rhode Island Governor stood alone among the governors in his 
refusal to take the oath to support the Stamp Act." 

Governor Ward had unusual influence with the people of the 
State, and his personal views undoubtedly contributed to Rhode 
Island's prominent position in colonial affairs. His rival in the 
politics of the State, Governor Stephen Hopkins, was equally clear 
in his anticipations of coming events. Without hesitation his 
opinions were freely expressed. 

In October, 1774, Colonel Paul Revere was in Philadelphia. 
During his visit he chanced to be in conversation with several of 
the congressional delegates at a time when Hopkins was present. 
The probability of England's repealing the obnoxious acts was the 
subject of discussion. Suddenly turning and facing the company, 
he said : 

"Gentlemen, those of you who indulge this opinion, I think, 
deceive yourselves. Powder and ball will decide this question. 
The gun and bayonet alone will finish the contest in which we are 
engaged, and any of you who can not bring your mind to this mode 
of adjusting the question had better retire in time, as it will not, 
perhaps, be in your power after the first blood shall have been shed." 

The Rhode Island Assembly met May ist, 1776, at the State 
house on Benefit street, in Providence. On May fourth the act 
separating the colony from Great Britian was passed unanimously 



91 

in the upper house, and with sixty members of the lower house 
present all but six voted in favor of the bill and it became a law. 

RHODE ISLAND ACTS AND RESOLVES. 
May Session, 1776, Page 22. 

AN ACT REPEALING AN ACT, INTITLED, "aN ACT FOR THE MORE EF- 
FECTUALLY SECURING TO HIS MAJESTY THE ALLEGIANCE OF HIS 
SUBJECTS, IN THIS HIS COLONY AND DOMINION OF RHODE-ISLANK 
AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS;" AND ALTERING THE FORMS OF 
COMMISSIONS, OF ALL WRITS AND PROCESSES IN THE COURTS, AND 
OF THE OATHS PREFCRIBED BY LAW. 

Whereas in all States, exifting by Compact, Protection and 
Allegiance are reciprocal, the latter being only due in Confequence 
of the former; and whereas George the Third, King of Great- 
Britain, forgetting His Dignity, regardlefs of the Compact moft 
folemnly entered into, ratified and confirmed, to the Inhabitants of 
this Colony, by his illuftrious Anceftors, and till of late fully recog- 
nized by Him — and entirely departing from the Dlities and Char- 
acter of a good King, inftead of protecting, is endeavoring to de- 
ftroy the good People of this Colony, and of all the United Colonies, 
by fending Fleets and Armies to America, to confifcate our Prop- 
erty, and fpread Fire, Sword and Defolation, throughout our 
Country, in order to compel us to fubmit to the moft debafing and 
deteftible Tyranny; whereby we are obliged by Neceffity, and it 
becomes our higheft Duty, to ufe every Means, with which God 
and Nature have furnifhed us, in Support of our invaluable Rights 
and Privileges; to oppofe that Power which is exerted only for 
our DeftrtiCtion. 

Be it therefore Enacted by this General Affembly, and by the 
Authority thereof it is Enacted, That an Act intituled, "An Act for 
the more effectual fecuring to his Majefty the Allegiance of his 



92 

Subjects in this his Colony and Dominion of Rhode-Ifland and 
Providence Plantations," be, and the fame is hereby, repealed. 

And be it further Enacted by this General Affembly and by 
the Authority thereof it is Enacted, That in all Commiffions for 
Offices, civil and military, and in all Writs and Proceffes in Law, 
whether oiiginal, judicial or executory, civil or criminal, wher- 
ever the Name and Authority of the faid King is made Ufe 
of, the fame fhall be omitted, and in the Room thereof the Name 
and Authority of the Governor and Company of this Colony fhall 
be Fubftituted, in the following Words, to wit: "The Governor 
and Company of the English Colony of Rhode-Ifland and Provi- 
dence Plantations :" That all Fuch Commiffions, Writs and Pro- 
ceffes, fhall be otherwife of the fame Form and Tenure as they 
heretofore were : That the Courts of Law be no longer entitled 
nor confidered as the King's Courts: And that no Infrument in 
Writing, of any Nature or Kind, whether public or private, fhall 
in the Date thereof mention the Year of the faid King's Reign: 
Provided neverthelefs That nothing in this Act contained fhall ren- 
der void or vitiate any Commiffion, Writ, Procefs or Inftrument, 
heretofore made or executed, on Account of the Name and Author- 
ity of the faid King being therein inferted. 

And be it further Enacted by the Authority aforefaid, That 
the Oaths or Engagements to be administered to the Officers ap- 
pointed in this Colony fhall be as follows, to wit: (Omitted for 
want of space). 

The preamble states in concise and pertinent language the 
cause of the colony aganst the king. Its first clause : 

"Whereas, in all states, existing by compact, protection and al- 
legiance are reciprocal, the latter being due only in consequence 
of the former," 

testifies to the world a fundamental principle of allegiance and 
government. The remainder of the preamble charges George III 



93 

with a total failure to protect, and with such positive acts of oppres- 
sion that no other course is open to the colony except self-protection 
by force. 

The first enactment logically follows and repeals allegiance in 
the colony and dominion of Rhode Island to the Kingdom of Great 
Britain. 

The second enactment follows with equal propriety. All legal 
forms heretofore in use, by which the people of the State indicated 
their dependence upon the sovereign of Great Britain, were forever 
swept away. The name of the king upon all public papers was 
abolished, and there was substituted, "The Governor and Company 
of the English Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." 

From that time Rhode Island became a free and independent 
State. 

Immediately upon the passage of the act it was printed on a 
suitable broadside, duly signed by the authority of the colony, and 
distributed. It was at once noticed in the local papers. The next 
morning the Providence Gazette forever removed from the head of 
its columns the arms of Great Britain and substituted therefor the 
arms of Rhode Island. The proclamation was forwarded to the 
assemblies of other colonies and was prominently noticed in news- 
papers of the day. 

The Boston Gazette of May 20, 1776, mentioned the act by 
title as having been passed. 

The Continental Journal of May 30, 1776, prints the Rhode 
Island act of May 4th in full. 

The New England Chronicle of May 23, 1776, prints the Rhode 
Island act of May 4th in full, giving it the important place of nearly 
all the first column of the first page. 

The Rernembrancer for 1776, a magazine published in London 
and entitled an Impartial Repository of Public Events, prints the 
Rhode Island act of May 4, 1776, almost entire. 



94 

The Rhode Island declaration was published in prominent 
English papers. The London Chronicle for August 3, 1776, printed 
the whole of the Rhode Island act, giving it nearly a column. It is 
indexed in the newspaper: "Rhode Island, all Allegiance to the 
Crown of Britain Renounced by the General Assembly." 

The national Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, was 
printed in the London Chronicle of August 17th, of the same year. 

The Rhode Island act was also printed in the following London 
papers : 

The Morning Chronicle and London Advertiser, No. 2249, 
August 5th, 1776. 

The Daily Advertiser, August 5th, 1776. 

The Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser, August 5th, 1776. 

The Morning Post and Daily Advertiser, August 6th, 1776. 

No mention was found in any of these papers of the Massa- 
chusetts act of May first, 1776. 

Governor Cooke wrote to General Washington, on May 6, 
1776, as follows: "I also enclose a copy of an Act discharging the 
inhabitants of this Colony from allegiance to the King of Great 
Britain, which was carried in the House of Deputies, after a debate, 
with but SIX dissentient voices; there being upwards of sixty mem- 
bers present." 

Not only in the daily publications, but in many histories recog- 
nized as authorities upon American affairs, the Rhode Island act is 
prominently noticed. 

E. Benjamin Andrews, in his History of the United States, 
says: " May 4 (1776), Rhode Island formally declared her inde- 
pendence of Great Britain, by a solemn act, abjuring her allegiance 
to the British Crown. . 

It constitutes Rhode Island as the oldest independent state in 
America." 



95 

Bancroft, in his History of the United States, says: "The 
despondency and hesitation of the assembly of Pennsylvania was in 
marked contrast with the fortitude of Rhode Island, whose general 
assembly, on the fourth day of May (1776), passed an act, dis- 
charging the inhabitants of that colony from allegiance to the king 
of Qreat Britain. . . . The overturn was complete; the act 
was at once a declaration of independence, and an organization of 
a self-constituted republic." 

Bryant and Gay, History of the United States, after referring 
to the act of May fourth, 1776, and quoting largely from it, then 
states: "Thus the first colony to declare her absolute independence 
of the crown, was Rhode Island." 

Chief Justice Job Durfee states: "She was the first to enact 
and declare independence. In May, preceding the declaration of 
the fourth of July by the Continental Congress, the general assembly 
of this state repealed the act more efifectually to secure allegiance 
to the king, and enacted an oath of allegiance to the state, and re- 
quired that all judicial processes should be in the name of the state, 
and no longer in His Majesty's name; whereby, Rhode Island, from 
that moment, became, and is at this day, the oldest sovereign and 
independent state in the western world." 

Green, History of Rhode Island: "The last colonial assembly 
of Rhode Island met on the first day of May (1776). On the 
fourth, two months before the Congressional declaration of inde- 
pendence, it solemnly renounced its allegiance to the British crown, 
no longer closing its session with 'God Save the King!' but taking 
in its stead, as expressive of their new relation, 'God Save the 
United Colonies !' " 

Mowry, History of the United States : "The first state actually 
to declare herself independent of Great Britain was Rhode Island. 
This act was passed May 4, 1776." 



96 

Smith, The Thirteen Colonies : "In this wise, in May, 1776, the 
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, before any other colony 
declared their absolute independence of the British crown." 

Judge Staples, in Rhode Island in the Continental Congress, 
referring to the act of May 4, 1776, states : "It is believed to be the 
earliest vote of the kind passed by any of the colonies. It severed 
the connection between Rhode Island and the British crown, and the 
English colony of Rhode Island became henceforth a sovereign 
state." 

These authorities unquestionably confer on Rhode Island prior- 
ity in declaring independence. 

The Connecticut Assembly convened May 9, 1776, and during 
the session passed an act repealing an act of this colony, entitled, 
"An Act Against High Treason." It was also enacted that all 
writs and processes in "law or equity shall issue in the name of the 
Governor and Company of the Colony of Connecticut, instead of 
his Majesty's name." . . . and "that no writ or process shall 
have or bear any date save the year of our Lord Christ only." 
The oaths of allegiance and supremacy were repealed and new 
forms of oaths in harmony with the above acts were prescribed. 

At a convention of the colony of Virginia on Wednesday, May 
15, 1776, a preamble and two resolutions were unanimously passed. 
The principal resolution is as follows : 

"Resolved unanimously, that the delegates appointed to repre- 
sent this colony in General Congress, be instructed to propose to that 
respectable body to declare the United Colonies free and indepen- 
dent states, absolved from all allegiance to, or dependence upon, 
the crown or parliament of Great Britain; and that they give the 
assent of this colony to such declaration, and to whatever measures 
may be thought proper and necessary by the Congress for forming 
foreign alliances, and a confederation of the colonies at such time 
and in the manner as to them shall seem best: Provided, that the 



97 

power of forming government for, and the regulations of the in- 
ternal concerns of each colony, be left to the respective colonial 
legislatures." 

In response to the advice of the Continental Congress, the 
colony of New Jersey on July 2, 1776, agreed upon a set of charter 
rights and the form of the constitution, which contained this clause : 

"Provided always, and it is the true Intent and Meaning of 
this Congress, That if a Reconciliation between Great Britain and 
these Colonies should take Place, and the latter be again taken 
under the Protection and Government of the Crown of Great 
Britain, this Charter shall be null and void, otherwise to remain 
firm and inviolable." 

After a diligent search in the published acts of the colonies of 
New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, 
and Georgia, no act in any way separating these colonies from Great 
Britain has been discovered. 

South Carolina, Feb. 13, 1777, established an oath of abjura- 
tion and allegiance to the state. 

The legislative body that enacted the Rhode Island Declaration 
of Independence was established by the charter of the colony grant- 
ed in 1663 by King Charles the Second. It had been since then the 
duly recognized government of Rhode Island. It was not elected 
for a special purpose, but for the general government of the colony. 
It was not a provincial assemblage, created in the emergency caused 
by the failure of Great Britain's authorities to maintain order and 
before the formation of another staple government. It did not 
vehemently protest that it had no thought of independence and leg- 
islated only to cover the interval until the authority of Great Britain 
should be restored. It did not disavow nor seek to explain its own 
acts tending toward independence. Rhode Island understood and 
appreciated her rights. She made no apologies. The period of 
dignified petition for the recognition of her liberties had passed. 



Without hesitation or undue debate, with the courage of conviction 
and the determination to be free, the authority that had governed 
the colony for nearly one hundred and thirteen years forever ter- 
minated its allegiance to Great Britain. 

The act was in entire harmony with the past history of the 
colony. Its repeated overt acts against the authority of England, 
extending from 1764 to 1772, had placed it far in advance of the 
other colonies in the entirely unofficial popular uprisings against 
Great Britain. They were followed as a legitimate consequence by 
the first unofficial suggestion for a permanent Congress of the 
American colonies, published in the "Providence Gazette" for May 
14, 1774: 

"It seems to be the universal opinion in America, that the 
Union of the Colonies is of the greatest Importance to their Security, 
and therefore ought to be pursued by every good Man in this 
Country. It is hoped that the Wisdom of this great People will 
ever be exerted to make the Union perpetual ; and for this Purpose 
it is proposed that there be an Assembly of the American States, 
consisting of Deputies from the Representative Body in each Colony, 
to form a League and Covenant for the Colonies to enter into, and 
fix the Union upon a basis which may, by the Blessing of Heaven, 
be durable as the World, and lay a foundation for Freedom and 
Happiness in America to all future Ages." (Exhibit K.) 

The official act of Rhode Island in some respects ante-dated 
the irrepressible popular efiforts of her people in behalf of liberty. 
As early as 1732-33 the colony, through its agent in London, of- 
ficially petitioned and protested against the passage of the Sugar 
Act by the English House of Commons. It proclaimed the then 
novel principle that the people of Rhode Island could not rightfully 
be taxed by the House of Commons, as they were not represented 
in that body. This official claim of the Revolutionary contention 
"No Taxation without Representation" was emphatically rejected. 



99 

Rhode Island in her Stamp Act Resolutions, Sept. i6, 1765, was 
the only colony to direct her colonial officers to defy the power of 
Great Britain and to execute the laws of the colony. 

The first official call for the Continental Congress was voted 
at the Providence town meeting held May 17, 1774. 

"That the deputies of this town be requested to use their in- 
fluence at the approaching session of the General Assembly of this 
colony, for permitting a congress, as soon as may be, of the repre- 
sentatives of the General Assemblies of the several colonies and 
provinces of North America, for establishing the firmest union; 
and adopting such measures as to them shall appear the most ef- 
fectual to answer that important purpose ; and to agree upon proper 
methods for executing the same." 

Rhode Island was the first to elect congressional delegates. 
On June 15, 1774, less than a month after the passage of the Provi- 
dence resolutions, her General Assembly elected Stephen Hopkins 
and Samuel Ward to represent the colony in the Continental Con- 
gress. 

April 25, 177s, the Rhode Island Assembly authorized an army 
of observation of fiften hundred men. 

June 15th, 1775, the Rhode Island legislature authorized the 
first Colonial Navy, and placed it under the command of Commo- 
dore Abraham Whipple. The day he received his commission, 
after a sharp action, he defeated the tender of the Rose frigate, 
drove her upon the Conanicut shore, and captured her stores and 
outfit. This was the first action between an official vessel, duly 
commissioned by any of the colonies, and any vessel in the service 
of the King. To Commodore Whipple, therefore, belongs the 
honor of firing the first cannon upon the seas in the defense of 
American liberty against any portion of the King's navy. 

Rhode Island's energetic action on the sea in her own behalf 
was followed, August 26, 1775, by the formal instructions of her 
General Assembly to the colony's Congressional delegates 



100 

"to use their whole influence, at the ensuing Congress, for 
building at the Continental expense, a fleet of sufficient force, for 
the protection of these colonies, and for employing them in such 
manner and places as will most effectually annoy our enemies, and 
contribute to the common defense of these colonies." 

Bancroft states, after citing these circumstances, "This was 
the origin of our navy." 

In May, 1775, it became evident that Governor Wanton was 
not in harmony with the people of the colony. He had just been 
elected for the seventh time. In various ways he had exhibited 
decided opposition to the cause of colonial defense, and had even 
refused to sign the commission for the officers of the new army. 

"By all which he hath manifested his intentions to defeat the 
good people of these colonies in their present glorious struggle to 
transmit inviolate to posterity, those sacred rights they have re- 
ceived from their ancestors." 

With the decision and courage that usually marked the action 
of the colony he was disqualified by the Assembly. Nov. 7, 1775, 
Governor Wanton, having continued his opposition to the cause of 
liberty, was formerly deposed, the office of Governor declared va- 
cant, and the Deputy-Governor, Nicholas Cooke, elected to fill the 
vacancy. 

By such successive steps Rhode Island approached indepen- 
dence, and the colony became, by enactment. May 4th, 1776, a free 
and independent republic. Her people, inspired with ardent patri- 
otism, hesitated at no sacrifice to maintain their position. 

On sea as on land, the armed forces of the colony strove valor- 
ously for the colonial cause. In privateering, the State was partic- 
ularly successful, and secured large profits from these enterprises. 
The activity and success of the State's private armed vessels gained 
wide reputation, and caused Providence to be known as the "Hor- 
net's Nest." 



101 

At Trenton, in 1777, a considerable portion of Washington's 
army consisted of Col. Hitchcock's brigade, formed in greater part 
of three Rhode Island regiments, Hitchcock's, Varnum's, and Lip- 
pitt's. These men participated in the action at Assunpink Creek, 
joined in the fateful march the following night, and fought at 
Princeton in the morning. After the contest, and on the field of 
battle. Gen. Washington, taking Col. Hitchcock by the hand, ex- 
pressed high admiration of his conduct and that of his troops and 
desired him to convey his thanks to the brigade. 

At Springfield, in 1780, a portion of Col. Angell's regiment, 
consisting of 170 men, in checking for forty minutes the advance 
of 1,500 of the enemy, rendered signal service to the Continental 
cause. Washington highly complimented this regiment in general 
orders, and wrote to Gov. Greene, as follows : — 

"The gallant behavior of Col. Angell's, on the 23d instant at 
Springfield, reflects the highest honor upon the officers and men. 
They disputed an important pass with so obstinate a bravery that 
they lost upwards of forty in killed, wounded, and missing, before 
they gave up their ground to a vast superiority of force." . . . 
He adds, in conclusion: "The ready and ample manner in which 
your State has complied with the requisitions of the Committee of 
co-operation, both as to men and supplies, entitle her to the thanks 
of the public, and affords the highest satisfaction to your Excel- 
lency's most obedient servant George Washington." 

Rhode Island was equally marked for her financial support of 
the patriot cause, as stated by the late Judge Horatio Rogers. 

"In 1783, the Continental Loan Ofiice accounts show that only 
four states had contributed more to the public treasury than Rhode 
Island, diminutive as she was, and in proportion to population none 
could compare with her. With less than a quarter of the inhabi- 
tants of Maryland she held half again as much of the public debt. 
Though only one-eighth as populous as Virginia, she was a public 



102 

creditor in more than double the amount of that great state; and 
while North Carolina and South Carolina each possessed more than 
three times the number of inhabitants of Rhode Island, yet this 
state held upwards of six times more of the public debt than the 
former, and upwards of seven times more than the latter." 

In proclaiming the action of Rhode Island and her people in 
the conflict for American liberty, and in submitting evidence of their 
services in the Continental cause, it is never to be forgotten that 
each of the thirteen colonies was finally inspired with similar patri- 
otism and an equal determination to achieve Independence. Each 
furnished its quota of ennobling sacrifices and heroic deeds. In 
grateful recognition of the patriotic services of our ancestors we 
confidently maintain the claims of Rhode Island. 

(Copyright 1907 by Charles Warren Lippitt.) 

The Bibliography, the Index and the various Exhibits contained 
in the first edition of this address and referred to in the text, were 
omitted for want of space. 



u 



/' 




IHh library of congress 



011 801 532 




s» 



fi>i: 







«^ 




:^-- V 




